In re the Assignment of Swezey

New York Court of Common Pleas

In re the Assignment of Swezey

64 How. Pr. 331

DecidedDecember 15, 1881

StatusPublished

This text of 64 How. Pr. 331 (In re the Assignment of Swezey) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Common Pleas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re the Assignment of Swezey, 64 How. Pr. 331 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1881).

Pincite

Opinion

Van Hoesen, J.

The papers on appeal are obnoxious to the objections made by Mr. Eipley, and his motion is granted.

The papers submitted on each order should be separated. My opinion should be inserted. The opinion of judge Lawrence was never read to me, nor submitted to me; but if it had been, it would not have affected my decision. This observation is not intended to apply any want of respect for judge Lawrence, or for his opinions, but is made because that decision has no bearing on the question involved in this proceeding. The indorsement of Dart at the adjournment should appear.

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

Van Hoesen, J.

The papers on appeal are obnoxious to the objections made by Mr. Eipley, and his motion is granted.

The papers submitted on each order should be separated. My opinion should be inserted. The opinion of judge Lawrence was never read to me, nor submitted to me; but if it had been, it would not have affected my decision. This observation is not intended to apply any want of respect for judge Lawrence, or for his opinions, but is made because that decision has no bearing on the question involved in this proceeding. The indorsement of Dart at the adjournment should appear.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

64 How. Pr. 331, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-assignment-of-swezey-nyctcompl-1881.