Legal Opinion

Young v. Scott

New York Supreme Court

Decided May 15, 1842Published

Error to the Chemung C. P. Young sued Scott by summons before Horace Ogden, a justice of the peace, and when the cause was called on the return day of the summons, the defendant moved that the cause be dismissed on the grounds set forth in his affidavit, which, after giving the title of the cause and the name of the justice, was in the following words:— “ Andrew Scott being sworn says, that the above named justice is a material witness for this deponent on the trial of this…

Read the full summary

Error to the Chemung C. P. Young sued Scott by summons before Horace Ogden, a justice of the peace, and when the cause was called on the return day of the summons, the defendant moved that the cause be dismissed on the grounds set forth in his affidavit, which, after giving the title of the cause and the name of the justice, was in the following words:— “ Andrew Scott being sworn says, that the above named justice is a material witness for this deponent on the trial of this cause, and without whose testimony he cannot safely proceed to the trial of said cause; that he expects to prove by said…

1Opinion of the Court

By the Court, Bronson, J.

A judgment of discontinuance might formerly be obtained on an affidavit stating, that the jus*34tice was a material witness for the defendant, without whose . testimony he could not safely proceed to the trial of the cause. (2 R. S. 246, § 118.) But in addition to this, the defendant must now set forth “the particular facts and circumstances which he expects to prove by the justice ;” and the discontinuance is to be entered, “if the justice shall be satisfied that he is a material witness for the defendant, and that without his testimony the defendant cannot safely…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Geib v. IcardNew York Supreme Court · 1814

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

Powered by the Exa API