Flanagan v. Murphy

New York Supreme Court

Flanagan v. Murphy

2 Wend. 291

DecidedMay 15, 1829

StatusPublished

This text of 2 Wend. 291 (Flanagan v. Murphy) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Flanagan v. Murphy, 2 Wend. 291 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1829).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court, Sutherland, J.

The original affidavit was defective in not accounting why it was made by the attorney instead of the party. That, however, is now satis- . \ : , „ . factoruy explained; and, although the affidavit produced is made long since the expiration of thirty days after the judgment, it, notwithstanding, is receivable. Explanatory matter may be shewn by affidavit, even on the motion to quash the certiorari. (1 R. L. 396. 6 Johns. R. 327.) The motion, therefore, is denied ; but the plaintiff in error must pay the costs of this application.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

By the Court, Sutherland, J.

The original affidavit was defective in not accounting why it was made by the attorney instead of the party. That, however, is now satis- . \ : , „ . factoruy explained; and, although the affidavit produced is made long since the expiration of thirty days after the judgment, it, notwithstanding, is receivable. Explanatory matter may be shewn by affidavit, even on the motion to quash the certiorari. (1 R. L. 396. 6 Johns. R. 327.) The motion, therefore, is denied ; but the plaintiff in error must pay the costs of this application.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 Wend. 291, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/flanagan-v-murphy-nysupct-1829.