Jacobs v. Marshall
The Superior Court of New York City
Each action comes before the court on an appeal by the defendant from an order opening a judgment by default, and allowing the defendant to answer, the defendant being dissatisfied with the terms imposed as a condition to his being permitted to answer, he being precluded by such terms from setting up the defence of usury.
Read the full summary
Each action comes before the court on an appeal by the defendant from an order opening a judgment by default, and allowing the defendant to answer, the defendant being dissatisfied with the terms imposed as a condition to his being permitted to answer, he being precluded by such terms from setting up the defence of usury. When the answer was served, or attempted to be, it was handed back to the boy or messenger, and he was told it would not be received because the time to answer had expired. The messenger, on reaching the office of defendant’s' attorney, was instructed to carry it back and…
1Opinion of the CourtBy the Court. Woodruff, J.
We fully concur with the court at Special Term, in holding the defaults herein entirely regular. The affidavits on the part of the plaintiff not only show, that no extension of the time to plead was given, but that nothing was done or said which should have misled the defendants’ attorneys.
And in once returning the answers, when served after the time to answer had expired, informing the messenger by whom the answers were sent, that they would not receive them because the time to answer had expired, the plaintiff’s attorneys did all which the rules of practice or just notions of candor and…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Whitaker v. DesfosseThe Superior Court of New York City · 1861
- Franklin Bank Note Co. v. . MacKeyNew York Court of Appeals · 1899
- Foshay v. DrostThe Superior Court of New York City · 1860