In re Pupke

S.D. New York

In re Pupke

20 F. Cas. 59, 1 Ben. 342

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided August 15, 1867·Published

Opinion

BLATCHFORD. District Judge

(after looking at the statute], expressed some doubt whether a jury could be demanded on any day but the return day. But the counsel for the petitioning creditor saying that he had no objection, the judge ordered the case to be adjourned, making it a part of the order, that the adjournment was to be “with like effect, in all respects, as if that day were the return day of the order, instead of this day.”

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

BLATCHFORD. District Judge

(after looking at the statute], expressed some doubt whether a jury could be demanded on any day but the return day. But the counsel for the petitioning creditor saying that he had no objection, the judge ordered the case to be adjourned, making it a part of the order, that the adjournment was to be “with like effect, in all respects, as if that day were the return day of the order, instead of this day.”

In re Pupke, 20 F. Cas. 59, 1 Ben. 342 (S.D.N.Y. 1867).

Pincite

20 F. Cas. 59 (In re Pupke) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.