Wiest v. Critsinger
4 Johns. 117
Opinion
An adjournment made by the justice, absent from the place where the court was appointed to be held, and in the absence of the parties, and by a note in writing without his signature, was clearly not an adjournment of which the parties were bound to take notice.
The cause was, consequently, discontinued and out of court. The subsequent proceeding was null, and the judgment must be reversed.
Judgment reversed»
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Wiest v. Critsinger, 4 Johns. 117 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1809).
4 Johns. 117 (Wiest v. Critsinger) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Bennett v. Mannix
30 Misc. 2d 613 (New York Supreme Court, 1961)
Iowa Union Telephone Co. v. Boylan
52 N.W. 1122 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1892)
United States v. Rundlett
27 F. Cas. 915 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of New Hampshire, 1854)
Miller v. Watson
5 Cow. 195 (New York Supreme Court, 1825)
Stoddard v. Holmes
1 Cow. 245 (New York Supreme Court, 1823)