Post v. Westervelt

6 Sandf. 689
CourtThe Superior Court of New York City
DecidedJanuary 11, 1852
StatusPublished

This text of 6 Sandf. 689 (Post v. Westervelt) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering The Superior Court of New York City primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Post v. Westervelt, 6 Sandf. 689 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1852).

Opinion

The above point was ruled by

Sandford, J.,

with'the concurrence of all the Justices. At the June term, 1850, the plain[690]*690tiff noticed the cause for trial, it was reached and called on the calendar, but the plaintiff did not move it. By the statute, it thus became the clerk’s duty to place the cause on the calendar, when again noticed, as of the date of its being so called. The defendant moved for judgment as in case of a nonsuit, from which the plaintiff was relieved on paying costs and stipulating to try the cause at the next term. He accordingly noticed the cause for the next term, but it was not reached on the calendar. It would have been reached, if it had stood upon the date of the issue as it was prior to the neglect to try it at the June term.

A. L. Brown, for the defendant. L. 8. Thomas, for the plaintiff.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
6 Sandf. 689, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/post-v-westervelt-nysuperctnyc-1852.