Osburne v. Gilbert

New York Supreme Court

Osburne v. Gilbert

52 Barb. 158, 1868 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 98

CourtNew York Supreme Court

DecidedNovember 16, 1868

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 52 Barb. 158 (Osburne v. Gilbert) 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

Osburne v. Gilbert, 52 Barb. 158, 1868 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 98 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1868).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court, Marvin, J.

Clapp v. Graves, (26 N. Y. Rep. 418,) is decisive of this case. The only difference in the two cases is that in that case the issue was joined, nothing being said as to the residence of the defendant; in this case the attorney for the defendant said that the defendant resided in Allegany county; but he did not plead that fact, nor would he make an affidavit of it; and the justice very properly said that there was no evidence of the fact before him; that he would decide when there was. The defendant, by answering the complaint, waived any defense on the ground of residence, and thus gave the justice jurisdiction of his person, and the cause of action was one proper for a justice’s court. The question raised is fully discussed and decided in Clapp v. Graves, and there is no occasion for any further discussion.

The judgment must be affirmed.

Daniels, Marvin and Barleer, Justices.]

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

By the Court, Marvin, J.

Clapp v. Graves, (26 N. Y. Rep. 418,) is decisive of this case. The only difference in the two cases is that in that case the issue was joined, nothing being said as to the residence of the defendant; in this case the attorney for the defendant said that the defendant resided in Allegany county; but he did not plead that fact, nor would he make an affidavit of it; and the justice very properly said that there was no evidence of the fact before him; that he would decide when there was. The defendant, by answering the complaint, waived any defense on the ground of residence, and thus gave the justice jurisdiction of his person, and the cause of action was one proper for a justice’s court. The question raised is fully discussed and decided in Clapp v. Graves, and there is no occasion for any further discussion.

The judgment must be affirmed.

Daniels, Marvin and Barleer, Justices.]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

52 Barb. 158, 1868 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 98, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/osburne-v-gilbert-nysupct-1868.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack