Johnson v. Parmely

17 Johns. 129
New York Supreme Court·Decided October 15, 1819·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The affidavits show several incorrect decisions on the part of the referees, as to the admissibility of evidence; but we cannot interfere to set aside the report, which was in favor of the plaintiff, because it is not a case referribie under the statute. There is no pretence of any matter of account between the parties, in any manner connected with the claim or defence. This court will not, therefore, exercise any summary control over the proceedings. It is to be regarded as a mere arbitration, subject to the general law of arbitrament and awards. The entry of the submission in the book of common rules makes no difference. The motion of the defendant must be denied, with costs. (Miller and another v. Vaughan, 1 Johns. Rep 315. Stevenson v. Beecker, 1 Johns. Rep. 492.)

Motion denied.

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

Johnson v. Parmely, 17 Johns. 129 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1819).

17 Johns. 129 (Johnson v. Parmely) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Hovey v. Hovey
53 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 71 (New York Supreme Court, 1887)
Van Orden v. Tilden
13 Daly 396 (New York Court of Common Pleas, 1885)
Messenger v. Broom
1 Pin. 630 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1846)