Van Rensselaer v. Dole
1 Johns. Cas. 239
Opinion
It was incumbent on the defendant to obtain a judge’s certificate to stay the proceedings, which is expressly required by the fourth rule of January, 1799. Not having done this, nor accounted for the neglect, we cannot interfere.
Rule denied.
N. B. The case was afterwards argued and decided on its merits, by consent of parties. ■
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Van Rensselaer v. Dole, 1 Johns. Cas. 239 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1800).
1 Johns. Cas. 239 (Van Rensselaer v. Dole) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Priest v. Capitain
139 S.W. 204 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1911)
Hotchkiss v. Olmstead
37 Ind. 74 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1871)