Martin v. Wilson

New York Court of Appeals

Martin v. Wilson

3 How. Pr. 195

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Martin v. Wilson. Read the opinion of the Court — 1 N.Y. 240 →

New York Court of Appeals·Decided September 15, 1847·Published

Opinion

The court held the case under advisement two or three days,-when they [196]*196gave their decision by" Jewett, Chief Judge, stating that the proper remedy of the Defendant in error, was by demurrer; there was no practice or authority to authorize a replication to be stricken out as frivolous or inappropriate, unless it was evident that it was an insult to the court, or an improper paper to be on file; in such case the court would order it to be taken from the files. Motion denied with costs.

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

The court held the case under advisement two or three days,-when they [196]*196gave their decision by" Jewett, Chief Judge, stating that the proper remedy of the Defendant in error, was by demurrer; there was no practice or authority to authorize a replication to be stricken out as frivolous or inappropriate, unless it was evident that it was an insult to the court, or an improper paper to be on file; in such case the court would order it to be taken from the files. Motion denied with costs.

Martin v. Wilson, 3 How. Pr. 195 (N.Y. 1847).

Pincite

3 How. Pr. 195 (Martin v. Wilson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.