Grover & Baker Sewing Machine Co. v. Kimball

New York Supreme Court

Grover & Baker Sewing Machine Co. v. Kimball

64 Barb. 425, 1873 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7

DecidedJanuary 28, 1873

StatusPublished

This text of 64 Barb. 425 (Grover & Baker Sewing Machine Co. v. Kimball) 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

Grover & Baker Sewing Machine Co. v. Kimball, 64 Barb. 425, 1873 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1873).

Pincite

Opinion

Hardin, J.

By the papers used on the hearing of this motion, it appears that neither of the parties resides in the county of Madison, the county named in the complaint as the place of trial.

It is provided by section 125 of the Code that “the action shall be tried in the county in which the parties, or any of them, reside at the commencement of the action.” And this provision admits of no construction which would authorize the plaintiff to retain the place of trial in Madison county.

The point is settled, by authority, against the plaintiff. (International Life Ass. Co. v. Sweettand, 14 Abb. 240. Pond v. The Hudson River R. R. Co., 17 How. 543. Cooke v. State N. Bank of Boston, 50 Barb. 340. Hubbard v. Nat. Protec. Ins. Co., 11 How. 149. Conroe v. The Same, 10 id. 403.)

The motion is granted, with $10 costs.

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

Hardin, J.

By the papers used on the hearing of this motion, it appears that neither of the parties resides in the county of Madison, the county named in the complaint as the place of trial.

It is provided by section 125 of the Code that “the action shall be tried in the county in which the parties, or any of them, reside at the commencement of the action.” And this provision admits of no construction which would authorize the plaintiff to retain the place of trial in Madison county.

The point is settled, by authority, against the plaintiff. (International Life Ass. Co. v. Sweettand, 14 Abb. 240. Pond v. The Hudson River R. R. Co., 17 How. 543. Cooke v. State N. Bank of Boston, 50 Barb. 340. Hubbard v. Nat. Protec. Ins. Co., 11 How. 149. Conroe v. The Same, 10 id. 403.)

The motion is granted, with $10 costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

64 Barb. 425, 1873 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/grover-baker-sewing-machine-co-v-kimball-nysupct-1873.