Schuhardt v. Roth

New York Supreme Court

Schuhardt v. Roth

10 Abb. Pr. 203

CourtNew York Supreme Court

DecidedMarch 15, 1860

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 10 Abb. Pr. 203 (Schuhardt v. Roth) 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

Schuhardt v. Roth, 10 Abb. Pr. 203 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1860).

Pincite

Opinion

Bonney, J. (after stating the facts).

—The motion must, I think, be granted. The service of the order was regular, and in time to stay plaintiff’s proceedings, although not received until two days afterwards, and after judgment had been regularly and properly entered, according to all information which plaintiff’s attorneys then had. The defendants show no cause why earlier attention to the action was not given, and there is reasonable ground, at least, for believing that-their object was delay. Still they were strictly regular (Code, §§ 410, 411), and entitled to the benefit of the order, on receipt of which plaintiff’s attorneys should, I think, have moved to vacate it, or have opened the judgment and waited for an answer.

Motion granted, with $10 costs, to abide the event of the action.

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

Bonney, J. (after stating the facts).

—The motion must, I think, be granted. The service of the order was regular, and in time to stay plaintiff’s proceedings, although not received until two days afterwards, and after judgment had been regularly and properly entered, according to all information which plaintiff’s attorneys then had. The defendants show no cause why earlier attention to the action was not given, and there is reasonable ground, at least, for believing that-their object was delay. Still they were strictly regular (Code, §§ 410, 411), and entitled to the benefit of the order, on receipt of which plaintiff’s attorneys should, I think, have moved to vacate it, or have opened the judgment and waited for an answer.

Motion granted, with $10 costs, to abide the event of the action.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

10 Abb. Pr. 203, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schuhardt-v-roth-nysupct-1860.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack