Pratt & Barker v. Bank of Windsor

1 Harr. Ch. 254
CourtMichigan Court of Chancery
DecidedFebruary 2, 1841
StatusPublished

This text of 1 Harr. Ch. 254 (Pratt & Barker v. Bank of Windsor) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Court of Chancery primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Pratt & Barker v. Bank of Windsor, 1 Harr. Ch. 254 (Mich. Ct. App. 1841).

Opinion

The Chancellor.

This motion must be granted on the authority of the case of Dunn vs. Dunn, 4 Paige, 425. The case is there fully considered, and Chancellor Walworth, after a full examination of all the authorities upon the subject, comes to the conclusion, that the.service of a subpoena out of the state, is irregular.

Motion granted.

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

Related

Dunn v. Dunn
4 Paige Ch. 425 (New York Court of Chancery, 1834)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1 Harr. Ch. 254, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pratt-barker-v-bank-of-windsor-michchanct-1841.