Townsend v. Lee

3 Johns. 435
New York Supreme Court·Decided August 15, 1808·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The justice having once adjourned the cause for three months, at the request of the defendant, he could not, afterwards, grant a second adjournment, at the request of the same party.

In the case of Easton v. Coe, (2 Johnson, 383.) the first adjournment was with the consent of the parties, and not fay order of the justice. The judgment must be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Townsend v. Lee, 3 Johns. 435 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1808).

3 Johns. 435 (Townsend v. Lee) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People ex rel. Wilbur v. Eddy
57 Barb. 593 (New York Supreme Court, 1870)