Hicks v. Chamberlain
New York Supreme Court
The plaintiff obtained a verdict in & personal action, in November, 1833. The defendant tendered a bill of exceptions, and obtained an order enlarging the time to settle the same for forty days, and then staying all proceedings on the part of the plaintiff upon the verdict, until the further order of this court.
Read the full summary
The plaintiff obtained a verdict in & personal action, in November, 1833. The defendant tendered a bill of exceptions, and obtained an order enlarging the time to settle the same for forty days, and then staying all proceedings on the part of the plaintiff upon the verdict, until the further order of this court. The bill was duly settled, and at the last October term the plaintiff noticed the cause for argument in this court, and that he would apply for judgment on the ground of the frivolousness of the bill of exceptions, and obtained a rule for judgment, on the default of the defendant to…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Sava-ge, Ch. J.
This cause requires an examination of the provisions of the “ act relating to the supreme and circuit courts,” passed April 13, 1832. The policy of the act manifestly was to prevent causes being carried directly from the circuit to the supreme court, without first giving to the circuit judge time and opportunity deliberately to examine and decide the questions raised in the cause. It may often happen that when a question is presented in the hurry and bustle of a nisiprius court, the judge may make a decision, which, upon examination and reflection he would…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Maloney v. DowsNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1859
- Tucker v. WhiteNew York Supreme Court · 1862
- Molony v. DowsNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1859