McCormick v. Stivers
This text of 12 N.Y. St. Rep. 874 (McCormick v. Stivers) 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.
Opinion
The allegation in the moving affidavit that defendant’s attorney, not being able to find the cause upon the printed calendar, wrote to plaintiff’s attorney in reference thereto, offering to attend and try the cause upon a day to be fixed, and that he received no response to his letter, is not in any way controverted or explained. Taken in connection with the other facts, it shows that defendant's attorney was not guilty of any negligence. The expenses of trial were caused by failure of plaintiff’s attorney to comply with the reasonable [875]*875suggestion of defendant’s attorney, and by allowing him to continue in the belief that the cause would not be moved during that term.
The order appealed from should be affirmed, but without costs.
Barnard, P. J., and Dykman, J., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
12 N.Y. St. Rep. 874, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mccormick-v-stivers-nysupct-1887.