Slosson v. Wheaton

New York Supreme Court

Slosson v. Wheaton

1 Cole. & Cai. Cas. 122, 1 Cole. Cas. 121, 2 Johns. Cas. 111

DecidedOctober 15, 1800

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Cole. & Cai. Cas. 122 (Slosson v. Wheaton) 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

Slosson v. Wheaton, 1 Cole. & Cai. Cas. 122, 1 Cole. Cas. 121, 2 Johns. Cas. 111 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1800).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

It has already been decided, that in assumpsit, where the count is general, the coúrt [123]*123will never chañare the venue on a general affidavit. To entitle the defendant to prevail in his motion, the affidavit must be special; that is, it must state, that the defendant has reason to believe that special matter is intended to be given in evidence, enumerate the particulars, and declare that it arose in the county to which he would remove the cause, and not -elsewhere.

Motion denied.

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

Per Curiam.

It has already been decided, that in assumpsit, where the count is general, the coúrt [123]*123will never chañare the venue on a general affidavit. To entitle the defendant to prevail in his motion, the affidavit must be special; that is, it must state, that the defendant has reason to believe that special matter is intended to be given in evidence, enumerate the particulars, and declare that it arose in the county to which he would remove the cause, and not -elsewhere.

Motion denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Cole. & Cai. Cas. 122, 1 Cole. Cas. 121, 2 Johns. Cas. 111, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/slosson-v-wheaton-nysupct-1800.