James v. Berry

New York Court of Chancery

James v. Berry

1 Paige Ch. 647

DecidedDecember 5, 1829

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Paige Ch. 647 (James v. Berry) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Chancery primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

James v. Berry, 1 Paige Ch. 647 (N.Y. 1829).

Pincite

Opinion

The Chancellor:—The true construction of the rule of December 1st, 1825, (same as new rule 68,) is, that where notice of the order to produce witnesses has been served upon an agent, each party has double the usual time, before either can enter an order to close the proofs. If the adverse party wishes to shorten the time, he must obtain an order on his part, and serve notice thereof on the opposite [648]*648solicitor in person, or at Ms office. The complainant in tMs case has therefore sufficient time left to examine Ms witnesses, and no extension thereof is necessary.

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

The Chancellor:—The true construction of the rule of December 1st, 1825, (same as new rule 68,) is, that where notice of the order to produce witnesses has been served upon an agent, each party has double the usual time, before either can enter an order to close the proofs. If the adverse party wishes to shorten the time, he must obtain an order on his part, and serve notice thereof on the opposite [648]*648solicitor in person, or at Ms office. The complainant in tMs case has therefore sufficient time left to examine Ms witnesses, and no extension thereof is necessary.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Paige Ch. 647, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/james-v-berry-nychanct-1829.