Remsen v. Isaacs
1 Cai. Cas. 22, 1 Cole. & Cai. Cas. 158
Opinion
In King v. Hughes it was determined, that if a motion be made as non-enumcrated for irregularity, the [23] ground of merits muft be abandoned, though on the merits the irregularity may be infilled on.
Per curiam. The rule is according to the decifion cited. The application mull be for irregularity only to bring it on as a non-enumerated motion. If merits are united, it becomes enumerated.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Remsen v. Isaacs, 1 Cai. Cas. 22, 1 Cole. & Cai. Cas. 158 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1803).
1 Cai. Cas. 22 (Remsen v. Isaacs) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Robert v. Trader's Insurance
17 Wend. 631 (New York Supreme Court, 1836)