M'Vickar v. Woolcot

New York Supreme Court

M'Vickar v. Woolcot

1 Cole. & Cai. Cas. 501

DecidedAugust 15, 1805

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Cole. & Cai. Cas. 501 (M'Vickar v. Woolcot) 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

M'Vickar v. Woolcot, 1 Cole. & Cai. Cas. 501 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1805).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Were we to permit the amendment, the opposite party might lose the benefit of cross-examining ; for the interrogatories exhibited to one, might not be proper to administer to another, from [502]*502whom it might be wished to extract new evidence. ° The first part of the motion must, therefore, be denied ; but you may take a new commission at your peril, without, however, any stay of proceedings on the partrof the plaintiff.

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

Per Curiam.

Were we to permit the amendment, the opposite party might lose the benefit of cross-examining ; for the interrogatories exhibited to one, might not be proper to administer to another, from [502]*502whom it might be wished to extract new evidence. ° The first part of the motion must, therefore, be denied ; but you may take a new commission at your peril, without, however, any stay of proceedings on the partrof the plaintiff.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Cole. & Cai. Cas. 501, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mvickar-v-woolcot-nysupct-1805.