Kirk v. Hodgson

New York Court of Chancery

Kirk v. Hodgson

2 Johns. Ch. 550, 1817 N.Y. LEXIS 212, 1817 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 57

DecidedSeptember 22, 1817

StatusPublished

This text of 2 Johns. Ch. 550 (Kirk v. Hodgson) 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

Kirk v. Hodgson, 2 Johns. Ch. 550, 1817 N.Y. LEXIS 212, 1817 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 57 (N.Y. 1817).

Pincite

Opinion

The Chancellor

[ * 551 ]

said, he thought the mere fact of filing a replication was not sufficient to prevent the examination of a co-defendant, who appeared by the pleadings not to be interested in the cause. The dictum in Maddock was without reference to any authority to support it. If the filing a replication, was, of itself, decisive proof of interest, it would be in the power of the plaintiff to deprive a defendant of any witness. The rule to examine these *co-defendants must be granted, subject to all just exceptions; and if it should appear on the hearing that the co-defendants were interested, their depositions would, of course, be suppressed.

Rule accordingly.

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

The Chancellor

[ * 551 ]

said, he thought the mere fact of filing a replication was not sufficient to prevent the examination of a co-defendant, who appeared by the pleadings not to be interested in the cause. The dictum in Maddock was without reference to any authority to support it. If the filing a replication, was, of itself, decisive proof of interest, it would be in the power of the plaintiff to deprive a defendant of any witness. The rule to examine these *co-defendants must be granted, subject to all just exceptions; and if it should appear on the hearing that the co-defendants were interested, their depositions would, of course, be suppressed.

Rule accordingly.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 Johns. Ch. 550, 1817 N.Y. LEXIS 212, 1817 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 57, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kirk-v-hodgson-nychanct-1817.