Sweeney v. White

63 N.Y. St. Rep. 242
CourtThe Superior Court of New York City
DecidedOctober 15, 1894
StatusPublished

This text of 63 N.Y. St. Rep. 242 (Sweeney v. White) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering The Superior Court of New York City primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Sweeney v. White, 63 N.Y. St. Rep. 242 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1894).

Opinion

Gtldersleeve, J.

The plaintiff makes an application for leave to sue as a poor person. It appears from the plaintiff’s own papers on this motion that more than three years have passed since issue was joined in the action. Nor does plaintiff offer any excuse or explanation for such gross loches. The suit was actually begun over three years ago, and this application is evidently an afterthought. I am of opinion it should not be granted. Glasberg v. D. D., E. B. & B. Railroad Co., 12 Civ. Pro. R. 50. An application of this nature should .be made upon or soon after the commencement of the action. Ostrander v. Harper, 14 How. Pr. 16. The motion must be denied, but without costs. Motion denied, without costs.

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

Related

Ostrander v. Harper
14 How. Pr. 16 (New York Supreme Court, 1857)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
63 N.Y. St. Rep. 242, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sweeney-v-white-nysuperctnyc-1894.