Hinde v. Tubbs
10 Johns. 486
Opinion
The defendant’s counsel in this case received short notice of trial, and that was sufficient to put him on inquiry. He ought, therefore, to have applied at the next term, which was in August. The motion must be denied.
Motion denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Hinde v. Tubbs, 10 Johns. 486 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1813).
10 Johns. 486 (Hinde v. Tubbs) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Ætna Life Insurance v. McCormick
20 Wis. 265 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1866)
Van Hook v. Pendleton
28 F. Cas. 998 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York, 1848)