Strong v. De Forest

15 Abb. Pr. 427
New York Supreme Court·Decided February 15, 1863·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Sutherland, P. J.

It. appears from the testimony taken before the referee, that there was no application or motion to dissolve the injunction; but that the dissolution of the injunction followed from the dismissal of the complaint.

It cannot be said, therefore, that the counsel-fees of $500 were incurred in obtaining a dissolution of the injunction, and thus bringing this case within that of Coates a. Coates (1 Duer, 664); Wilde a. Joel (15 How. Pr., 320); and Edwards a. Bodine (11 Paige, 223). There was some evidence before the referee, that preparations were made by counsel to make a motion to dissolve the injunction ; but the referee does not find what the services of the counsel in making such preparation, as distinguished from services generally in the case and in the preparation for trial, were worth.

In my opinion, the report of the referee cannot be confirmed.

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

Strong v. De Forest, 15 Abb. Pr. 427 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1863).

15 Abb. Pr. 427 (Strong v. De Forest) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Maltz v. Westchester County Brewing Co.
167 A.D. 95 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1915)
Troxell v. Haynes
16 Abb. Pr. 1 (New York Court of Common Pleas, 1874)
Hovey v. Rubber Tip Co.
12 Abb. Pr. 360 (The Superior Court of New York City, 1872)