Morton v. Palmer

14 N.Y.S. 912, 39 N.Y. St. Rep. 236, 1891 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2561
New York Supreme Court·Decided June 12, 1891·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Van Brunt, P. J.

We see no reason for interfering with the order made by the court below. The rule is well settled that a party has a right to sue on any cause of action which he holds, and any statutory exception to that right must be definitely expressed. The only statutory restriction to which our attention has been called, and which we have been able to find, is section 1913 of the Code, which applies only to judgments rendered in a court of record in this state. This clearly has no application to a judgment recovered in the circuit court of the United States, as has been distinctly held in the case of Vulcanite Co. v. Frisselle, 22 Hun, 174. The judgment and order should be affirmed, with costs.

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

Morton v. Palmer, 14 N.Y.S. 912, 39 N.Y. St. Rep. 236, 1891 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2561 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1891).

14 N.Y.S. 912 (Morton v. Palmer) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Aultman & Taylor Co. v. Syme
79 F. 238 (Second Circuit, 1897)