Sleght v. Hartshorne
1 Johns. 149
This text of 1 Johns. 149 (Sleght v. Hartshorne) 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
Sleght v. Hartshorne, 1 Johns. 149 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1806).
Opinion
As the defendants at the trial, made no objection to the want of preliminary proofs, but proceeded in their defence on the merits of the causé, it must be presumed that their existence and competency were admitted. Being matter merely formal, and not controverted by the defendants, it 'was proper to state their admission in the special verdict.
Rule refused.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Crich v. Williamsburg City Fire Insurance
48 N.W. 198 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1891)
Emerson v. Bleakley
2 Abb. Ct. App. 22 (New York Court of Appeals, 1867)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
1 Johns. 149, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sleght-v-hartshorne-nysupct-1806.