Lockwood v. McLean
18 Wend. 344
Opinion
By the Court,
This case is distinguishable from Talman v. Barnes, (12 Wendell, 227,) where an admission of due service was held sufficient, though it was shown that short notice was given. The admission there was by. the attorney; here it is by the agent, who had no power to dispense with the full notice. The motion is denied with costs.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Lockwood v. McLean, 18 Wend. 344 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1837).
18 Wend. 344 (Lockwood v. McLean) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Talman v. Barnes
12 Wend. 227 (New York Supreme Court, 1834)