Davis v. Turner
New York Supreme Court
On the 22d October, 1849, proof was made before Willard, Justice, that execution had been issued to the sheriff of Saratoga county, upon a judgment in favor of the plaintiff against the three first named defendants (the judgment roll being filed in the Saratoga clerk’s office, and two of the above defendants being non-residents of this state,) and against the same defendants to the sheriff of Schenectady county, where the defendant Chevalier resides, for $103.28, and that…
Read the full summary
On the 22d October, 1849, proof was made before Willard, Justice, that execution had been issued to the sheriff of Saratoga county, upon a judgment in favor of the plaintiff against the three first named defendants (the judgment roll being filed in the Saratoga clerk’s office, and two of the above defendants being non-residents of this state,) and against the same defendants to the sheriff of Schenectady county, where the defendant Chevalier resides, for $103.28, and that the executions remain in the hands of the said sheriffs wholly unsatisfied, and that those defendants have property which…
1Opinion of the Court
Willard, Justice.
If Swits was a mere witness and not a party to this proceeding, he is entitled to the same fees as any other witness, and no more; and his remedy is by action against the party by whom he was called. The 301st section of the code does not authorize a judge to make any allowance, on the application of a witness. (Monell’s Practice, 365.) The 295th section enacts that witnesses may be required to appear and testify on any proceeding, under that chapter, in the same manner as upon the trial of an issue; and the act of 1840, p. 331, § 8, prescribes the fees to which they are…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Circle Floor Co. v. Siltan Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1962
- Ryan v. MaxeyMontana Supreme Court · 1894
- Holstein v. RiceNew York Supreme Court · 1862