Smith v. West
This text of 3 Johns. Ch. 363 (Smith v. West) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Chancery primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Under the circumstances of this case, the motion cannot be granted. There are, no doubt, frequent instances in which the court has allowed the plaintiff to reply, after the cause had been set down for hearing, on bill and answer. It is a matter resting in discretion. In some cases the plaintiff has been permitted to reply, after having gone to a hearing, on payment of costs. (Wyatt’s P. R. 375. Donegall v. Warr, 1 Eq. Cas. Abr. 43 pl. 4.) I shall, therefore, deny the motion, on condition that the plaintiff, within four days, pay the defendant’s costs arising from the cause being set down for [364]*364hearing in September last, and from the proceedings on thepart of the defendant, in May- last. No costs of the present motion to be allowed on either side.
Order accordingly-
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
3 Johns. Ch. 363, 1818 N.Y. LEXIS 192, 1818 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 10, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-west-nychanct-1818.