Clark v. McClaughry
New York Supreme Court
A. Taber,- for the defendant in error, moved to quash the writ of error, as having been irregularly issued. McClaughry sued Clark in a justice’s court and recovered judgment.
Read the full summary
A. Taber,- for the defendant in error, moved to quash the writ of error, as having been irregularly issued. McClaughry sued Clark in a justice’s court and recovered judgment. Clark appealed to the common pleas, where McClaughry again recovered ; but certain exception^ were taken by Clark, on the trial which took place in December, 1839. Time being given by stipulation, a bill of exceptions was served on the 10th of January, 1840, to which amendments were proposed, and the papers submitted for settlement on the 35th. The bill was soon after settled; and the papers handed to the attorney of the…
1Opinion of the Court
jBy the Court,
Cowen, J.
The statute of 1836, ch. 526, p. 794, (3 R. S. 392, 2d ed.,) declares, section first, that judgments of the common pleas on appeal or certiorari,from a justice’s court, shall be final and conclusive, except for the purpose of granting a new trial by the common pleas in a proper case. The second section provides that, at any time within thirty days after the record of judgment shall have beep filed, the first judge, or in his absence any other judge of the court below, who was present at the trial or • hearing, may, in his discretion, grant a certificate that, in his…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Blood v. WilderNew York Supreme Court · 1852
- Kelly v. Moody & DarbyNew York Supreme Court · 1844
- Moot v. ParkhurstNew York Supreme Court · 1842