Pierce v. Sheldon

New York Supreme Court

Pierce v. Sheldon

13 Johns. 191

CourtNew York Supreme Court

DecidedMay 15, 1816

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 13 Johns. 191 (Pierce v. Sheldon) 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

Pierce v. Sheldon, 13 Johns. 191 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1816).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Whether the justice was legally disqualified, on the ground that the plaintiff below was his son-in-law, is, perhaps, questionable ; but the gross indecency of an exercise of his judicial power, in such a case, should induce this court to scrutinize his proceedings with a jealous eye.

This suit was brought under the 13th section of the 25 dollar act, (1 R.L. 395.,) which provides a remedy, expressly, (i by action of debt” The objection to the form of action was, therefore, well taken, and the judgment ought to be reversed.

Judgment reversed.

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

Per Curiam.

Whether the justice was legally disqualified, on the ground that the plaintiff below was his son-in-law, is, perhaps, questionable ; but the gross indecency of an exercise of his judicial power, in such a case, should induce this court to scrutinize his proceedings with a jealous eye.

This suit was brought under the 13th section of the 25 dollar act, (1 R.L. 395.,) which provides a remedy, expressly, (i by action of debt” The objection to the form of action was, therefore, well taken, and the judgment ought to be reversed.

Judgment reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

13 Johns. 191, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pierce-v-sheldon-nysupct-1816.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack