Rogers v. Edmonds

7 N.Y.S. 881, 28 N.Y. St. Rep. 749, 55 Hun 604, 1889 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1360
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedDecember 10, 1889
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 7 N.Y.S. 881 (Rogers v. Edmonds) 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
Rogers v. Edmonds, 7 N.Y.S. 881, 28 N.Y. St. Rep. 749, 55 Hun 604, 1889 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1360 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1889).

Opinions

Pratt, J.

The defendant was personally served, and failed to appear. The justice had jurisdiction of the person and subject-matter of the action. The defendant claims that because the justice made a mistake in a date in the transcript that all the proceedings are void. This contention cannot prevail. It was an error which was clearly amendable, and was duly amended. The adjournment was not irregular, and judgment was properly rendered on the adjourned day. The mistake was a clerical error on the part of the j ustiee, and did not affect the judgment nor prejudice the defendant. We think no right of the defendant has been prejudiced, and that there is no merit in the appeal. Order affirmed, with costs.

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

Related

Bartlett v. Bunn
5 Silv. Sup. 87 (New York Supreme Court, 1889)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
7 N.Y.S. 881, 28 N.Y. St. Rep. 749, 55 Hun 604, 1889 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1360, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rogers-v-edmonds-nysupct-1889.