Pumpelly v. Crosby

New York Supreme Court

Pumpelly v. Crosby

8 Johns. 322

DecidedAugust 15, 1811

StatusPublished

This text of 8 Johns. 322 (Pumpelly v. Crosby) 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

Pumpelly v. Crosby, 8 Johns. 322 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1811).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The motion must be denied. The case [323]*323of Simson v. Neal, (2 Wils. 47.) on which the defendants’ counsel relies, has been overruled in the case of Hubert v. Lord Weymouth, (2 Black. Rep. 816.) and there can be no more reason for requiring the signature of counsel to a general replication than to a general plea. When the replication consists in a mere denial of the plea, without alleging any new matter therein, it need not be signed by counsel. This appears to be the settled practice of the court of K. B. (Sellon, 327. Impey’s K. B. Prac. 263.)

Motion denied,.

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

Per Curiam.

The motion must be denied. The case [323]*323of Simson v. Neal, (2 Wils. 47.) on which the defendants’ counsel relies, has been overruled in the case of Hubert v. Lord Weymouth, (2 Black. Rep. 816.) and there can be no more reason for requiring the signature of counsel to a general replication than to a general plea. When the replication consists in a mere denial of the plea, without alleging any new matter therein, it need not be signed by counsel. This appears to be the settled practice of the court of K. B. (Sellon, 327. Impey’s K. B. Prac. 263.)

Motion denied,.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

8 Johns. 322, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pumpelly-v-crosby-nysupct-1811.