Arden v. Rice
New York Supreme Court
This cause had been noticed by the plaintiffs for argument, at the last term, on a general demurrer filed by the defendants to the declaration; the court had, on the statement of the plaintiffs’ counsel that the demurrer was merely for delay, overruled it, and granted a rule for judgment, the *counsel pledging himself to open [*499] the rule any day on an affidavit of good cause of demurrer,-or of merits.
Read the full summary
This cause had been noticed by the plaintiffs for argument, at the last term, on a general demurrer filed by the defendants to the declaration; the court had, on the statement of the plaintiffs’ counsel that the demurrer was merely for delay, overruled it, and granted a rule for judgment, the *counsel pledging himself to open [*499] the rule any day on an affidavit of good cause of demurrer,-or of merits. On service of the rule for judgment, the defendants gave a cognovit, on which the plaintiff entered up his judgment in the last vacation.
1Per curiam
By the 8th rule of April, 1796, judgment, after a default entered, may be entered at any time after 4 days in term have intervened. The rule of July term, 1796, ordering all rules for judgment to be entered in term, and not in vacation, was abolished in April term, 1799, and restored the first rule. There is no good reason why four days in term should be given in this case to the defendants, any more than on a warrant of attorney to confess judgment. The defendants take nothing by their motion.
2Cited by1 opinion
- Bonnell v. WeaverU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Wisconsin · 1856