Legal Opinion

Christy v. Kiersted

New York Supreme Court

Decided August 25, 1874PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtLamont, J.

The place of trial designated in the complaint in. the first action is Cattaraugus county; in the second, Chautauqua county; and in each there is a demurrer to the whole complaint. In both actions the objection is made, that the trial of such issues of law cannot be had in Erie county; and, on the other hand, it is claimed that Such issues may be tried, as mere motions, at any special term in the judicial district.

*468The Code requires that the complaint shall contain (among other things) the name of the county in which the plaintiff desires the trial to be had (Sec. 142). I cannot find any…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Sheppard v. WilsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1848

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Kissam v. BremmermanNew York Supreme Court · 1898

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

Powered by the Exa API