Legal Opinion

Erisman v. Pidcock

New York Supreme Court

Decided November 15, 1881Published

Motion made by defendant to vacate an order referring the issues in this action to a referee, and appointing a receiver.

1Opinion of the CourtDaniels, J.

—Before the order was made, which it is now-insisted in support of the motion should be vacated, an order was made in form removing this cause into the circuit court of the United States. That order was served upon the attorneys for the plaintiff on the 11th day of November, 1880, while the order referring the action and appointing the *328receiver was not made until the thirteenth day of the same month. This order for the removal of the action was made under chapter 137 of the laws of congress, enacted in 1875 (Supplement to United States Statutes, 174, secs. 2, 3). The county designated in the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Kamp v. . KampNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
  2. Kern v. HuidekoperSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
  3. Insurance Co. v. DunnSupreme Court of the United States · 1874
  4. Bell v. . DixNew York Court of Appeals · 1872
  5. Rice v. EhleNew York Supreme Court · 1873

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API