Mather v. Wardell

New York Supreme Court

Mather v. Wardell

1 How. Pr. 172

DecidedJune 15, 1845

StatusPublished

This text of 1 How. Pr. 172 (Mather v. Wardell) 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

Mather v. Wardell, 1 How. Pr. 172 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1845).

Pincite

Opinion

Jewett, Justice.

The default can not be opened at this term ; if plaintiff’s counsel had been in attendance upon the court, it might be proper to open it; where counsel are in attendance watching their motions, and by mistake a default is taken against them, it is usual to open the default. Here the defendant’s counsel has made his motion and gone home, and his opponent does not appear at court or any other counsel for him, until nearly the close of the term. Notice must be given defendant’s attorney to open the motion at the next special term.

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

Jewett, Justice.

The default can not be opened at this term ; if plaintiff’s counsel had been in attendance upon the court, it might be proper to open it; where counsel are in attendance watching their motions, and by mistake a default is taken against them, it is usual to open the default. Here the defendant’s counsel has made his motion and gone home, and his opponent does not appear at court or any other counsel for him, until nearly the close of the term. Notice must be given defendant’s attorney to open the motion at the next special term.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 How. Pr. 172, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mather-v-wardell-nysupct-1845.