Soper v. Soper

New York Supreme Court

Soper v. Soper

5 Wend. 112

CourtNew York Supreme Court

DecidedNovember 18, 1830

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 5 Wend. 112 (Soper v. Soper) 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

Soper v. Soper, 5 Wend. 112 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1830).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court,

Savage, Ch. J.

The plea is unquestionably bad, but we feel reluctant to give judgment for the plaintiff non obstante veredicto. The presumption is that the discharge was granted by the proper officer; and on application, the defendant would have been permitted to amend. We accordingly suspend giving judgment, so that the defendant may apply to amend his plea, which motion will he granted by us on payment of all costs, and saving all the legal rights of the plaintiff.

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

By the Court,

Savage, Ch. J.

The plea is unquestionably bad, but we feel reluctant to give judgment for the plaintiff non obstante veredicto. The presumption is that the discharge was granted by the proper officer; and on application, the defendant would have been permitted to amend. We accordingly suspend giving judgment, so that the defendant may apply to amend his plea, which motion will he granted by us on payment of all costs, and saving all the legal rights of the plaintiff.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 Wend. 112, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/soper-v-soper-nysupct-1830.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack