Johnson v. Yeomans

8 How. Pr. 140
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedAugust 15, 1850
StatusPublished

This text of 8 How. Pr. 140 (Johnson v. Yeomans) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Johnson v. Yeomans, 8 How. Pr. 140 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1850).

Opinion

Shankland, Justice

Held that § 326, of the Code, forbids any change of the title of the action on appeal, and that the defendant can not in any legal sense of the term be called the plaintiff, so as to compel him to file security on appeal, under the provisions of the Revised Statutes.

He also held, that the action although appealed was the same, and not a new one, and was pending in the same court. That it could not be treated as a new action, as the old action commenced by writ of error, to remove the cause from one court to another, was formerly treated (see Traver vs. Nichols, 7 W. R. 434, and cases there cited). The motion was therefore denied.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
8 How. Pr. 140, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-yeomans-nysupct-1850.