Mellen v. Hutchins
New York County Courts
Mary E. Mellen, the plaintiff and respondent, resides at Worcester, Mass.; Charles D. Hutchins, the. defendant and appellant, in the city of Rochester, N. Y. The action was brought by long summons in the municipal court of the city of Rochester, which is not a court of record,† Judgment was recovered in favor of the respondent, and from that judgment the appellant appealed to this court.
Read the full summary
Mary E. Mellen, the plaintiff and respondent, resides at Worcester, Mass.; Charles D. Hutchins, the. defendant and appellant, in the city of Rochester, N. Y. The action was brought by long summons in the municipal court of the city of Rochester, which is not a court of record,† Judgment was recovered in favor of the respondent, and from that judgment the appellant appealed to this court. The respondent applied for a commission to take her own testimony in Massachusetts, and that of a witness in Akron, Ohio, under section 887 et seq. of Code. Upon the hearing of that application, the appellant…
1Opinion of the Court
Morgan, J.*
[After stating the facts.]—Upon the papers before me there seems to be good reason why the commissions should issue as applied for. The only question is whether security can be required to be filed by the respondent on the ground of her non-residence, under 2 R. 8. Edm. ed. 644, § 1, clause 1. It was held in Fennor v. Dickinson (4 Den. 84), that an appeal to the court of common pleas, from a justice of the peace, is but a continuation of the proceedings previously had, or action begun in the justice’s court. To the same effect is the case of Traver v. Nichols (7 Wend. 434). And it…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Traver v. NicholsNew York Supreme Court · 1831
- Fenno v. DickinsonNew York Supreme Court · 1847
- People ex rel. Tomb v. Judges of the county of WashingtonNew York Supreme Court · 1823