Hollenback v. Fleming
New York Supreme Court
Error to the Tioga common pleas. On the 27th of December, 1841, the parties executed mutual bonds of submission, conditioned to abide and perform the award of Camp, Wallis and Slosson, “ so as the award of the said arbitrators be made &c. in writing, ready to be delivered to the said parties in difference, on or before the first day of February nextand they agreed that judgment should be rendered upon the award by the Tioga common pleas pursuant to the statute.
Read the full summary
Error to the Tioga common pleas. On the 27th of December, 1841, the parties executed mutual bonds of submission, conditioned to abide and perform the award of Camp, Wallis and Slosson, “ so as the award of the said arbitrators be made &c. in writing, ready to be delivered to the said parties in difference, on or before the first day of February nextand they agreed that judgment should be rendered upon the award by the Tioga common pleas pursuant to the statute. On the first day of February, 1842, the arbitrators awarded in writing that Hollenback pay to Fleming the sum of $1500,78. At the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Bronson, J.
When there has been a submission to arbitration under the statute, judgment may be rendered on the award, “ upon such submission being proved by the affidavit of a subscribing witness thereto, and upon the award made in pursuance thereof being proved in like manner, or by the affidavit of the arbitrators.” (2 R. S. 542, § 9.) A *305subscribing witness is one who was present when the instrument was executed, and who at that time subscribed his name to it as a witness of the execution. (Henry v. Bishop, 2 Wend. 575.) The witness need not be present at the moment of…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Munns v. De NemoursU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Pennsylvania · 1811
- Henry & Emott v. BishopNew York Supreme Court · 1829
- Willoughby v. CarletonNew York Supreme Court · 1812