Schermerhorn v. Van Valkenburgh
New York Supreme Court
The plaintiff declared on the 23d of June last; and on the 12th of July, the defendant pleaded 4 pleas. On the 26th of July, the plaintiff replied, taking issue on 3 pleas; but he replied specially as to the other, with the usual rule an^ notice to rejoin in 20 days.
Read the full summary
The plaintiff declared on the 23d of June last; and on the 12th of July, the defendant pleaded 4 pleas. On the 26th of July, the plaintiff replied, taking issue on 3 pleas; but he replied specially as to the other, with the usual rule an^ notice to rejoin in 20 days. On the 31st of July, the defendant *obtained an order to stay all- proceedings on the plaintiff until the 2d non-enumerated day of August term, (10th of August,) last, with a view to a motion to discontinue the cause. On the 1st day of August the defendant served the order, and gave notice of the motion. On the 20th, the…
1Opinion of the Court
Curia.
The order to stay proceedings on the part of the plaintiff would not, per se, suspend the running of the rule to rejoin; the time allowed by which expired with the 15th of August. The order to stay, therefore, having ceased to operate before the 20th, the default of that'day was regular. And we can only interfere and set it aside on terms, which are payment of the costs.
Rule accordingly.
2Cited by2 opinions
- Allen v. FinkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1925
- Georgia Lumber Co. v. StrongNew York Supreme Court · 1847