Kirby v. Sisson

New York Supreme Court

Kirby v. Sisson

1 Wend. 83

CourtNew York Supreme Court

DecidedAugust 15, 1828

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 1 Wend. 83 (Kirby v. Sisson) 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

Kirby v. Sisson, 1 Wend. 83 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1828).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court,

Woodworth, J.

This motion is opposed, because it is said the plaintiff ought to have sought his remedy in a different mode : that he ought to have insisted on immediate payment or proceeded in the trial; to have awaited the event of the suit, and taxed the costs in the general bill, or served the defendant with a copy of the rule at nisi prius, and a copy of the taxed bill, and on demand and nonpayment, to have applied for an attachment in the first instance. The two first courses undoubtedly might have been pursued; so, also, the latter might have been adopted, if a rule had been entered; but yet this application is proper, if [84]*84the party thinks fit to pursue it; the rule for costs may or may not have been entered ; and if the plaintiff chooses to ask for an order of this court for the payment of those costs, he is entitled to if. The motion is granted, with costs.

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

By the Court,

Woodworth, J.

This motion is opposed, because it is said the plaintiff ought to have sought his remedy in a different mode : that he ought to have insisted on immediate payment or proceeded in the trial; to have awaited the event of the suit, and taxed the costs in the general bill, or served the defendant with a copy of the rule at nisi prius, and a copy of the taxed bill, and on demand and nonpayment, to have applied for an attachment in the first instance. The two first courses undoubtedly might have been pursued; so, also, the latter might have been adopted, if a rule had been entered; but yet this application is proper, if [84]*84the party thinks fit to pursue it; the rule for costs may or may not have been entered ; and if the plaintiff chooses to ask for an order of this court for the payment of those costs, he is entitled to if. The motion is granted, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Wend. 83, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kirby-v-sisson-nysupct-1828.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack