Legal Opinion

Jacobs v. Hooker

New York Supreme Court

Decided September 27, 1847PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtEdmonds, J.

That makes no difference. The risk of miscarriage falls upon him to whom the paper was directed. The rule says that such a service shall be a good one; and of necessity, therefore, the risk must be with the party to whom it is sent. Both judgments were irregular and must be set aside; but without costs. We allow no costs on motions, unless the motions are rendered necessary for the attainment of some substantial right in the cause; except sometimes we may allow them by way of punishment. My only doubt is whether I ought not to charge the defendant with the costs of setting aside his judgment.…

2Cited by9 opinions

  1. Hurley v. . OlcottNew York Court of Appeals · 1910
  2. McCoy v. State Employment BureauOhio Court of Appeals · 1947
  3. Schroedel Corp. v. State Highway CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1968
  4. Boeck v. State Highway CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1967
  5. Manchester v. Van BruntNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1893

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API