Tyler v. Olney

12 Johns. 378
New York Supreme Court·Decided October 15, 1815·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per.Curiam.

It would be the height of injustice to sustain • this judgment-. It may be questioned whether the suit was not discontinued and pfft of court.; butif not, - the justice- was bound. [379]*379to postpone the trial, as he had a right to-do, not exceeding six days, he having misled the defendant. Whether Durand was authorized to appear, was not made a question; the justice recognised him as the agent or attorney of the defendant; if he had disputed his authority, he should have' required the proof of it. The judgment must be reversed.. ' ■

Judgment reverse^.

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

Tyler v. Olney, 12 Johns. 378 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1815).

12 Johns. 378 (Tyler v. Olney) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Nelson v. Marly
10 Tenn. 576 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1831)