Jones v. Platt

60 How. Pr. 277
New York Supreme Court·Decided January 15, 1881·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Merlin, J.

In order to fairly comply with the order of Septemer 27, 1880, the plaintiff should, I think, either strike ot the last clause of the bill served—the clause com[280] mencing, “ Said defendant did as plaintiff is informed and believes at other places and dates and times,” &e.— or he should state the times and places with more particularity.

An order may be entered requiring a further bill to be served which shall strike out that clause or give the particular times and places. Costs of motion to defendant' to abide event.

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

Jones v. Platt, 60 How. Pr. 277 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1881).

60 How. Pr. 277 (Jones v. Platt) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

American Rolling Mill Corp. v. Ohio Iron & Metal Co.
120 Ill. App. 614 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1905)