Townsend v. Lee
3 Johns. 435
This text of 3 Johns. 435 (Townsend v. Lee) 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
Townsend v. Lee, 3 Johns. 435 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1808).
Opinion
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
Related
People ex rel. Wilbur v. Eddy
57 Barb. 593 (New York Supreme Court, 1870)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
3 Johns. 435, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/townsend-v-lee-nysupct-1808.