Wiest v. Critsinger
New York Supreme Court
THIS case arose on a certiorari, and was submitted to the court without argument. The return of the justice stated, that Wiest the defendant below, was summoned to appear before him at the house of Griffin Ransam, to answer to the plaintiff below, (Critsinger). That on the day appointed to appear, the justice could not attend, and sent a note, but ■without signing it, to the house of Ransam; adjourning the court to the 7th of November following.
Read the full summary
THIS case arose on a certiorari, and was submitted to the court without argument. The return of the justice stated, that Wiest the defendant below, was summoned to appear before him at the house of Griffin Ransam, to answer to the plaintiff below, (Critsinger). That on the day appointed to appear, the justice could not attend, and sent a note, but ■without signing it, to the house of Ransam; adjourning the court to the 7th of November following. On the day of the return of the summons, the parties appeared at Ranmirfs house, and remained some time, and the justice not appearing, they , ... ,…
1Per curiam
An adjournment made by the justice, absent from the place where the court was appointed to be held, and in the absence of the parties, and by a note in writing without his signature, was clearly not an adjournment of which the parties were bound to take notice.
The cause was, consequently, discontinued and out of court. The subsequent proceeding was null, and the judgment must be reversed.
Judgment reversed»
2Cited by5 opinions
- United States v. RundlettU.S. Circuit Court for the District of New Hampshire · 1854
- Iowa Union Telephone Co. v. BoylanSupreme Court of Iowa · 1892
- Stoddard v. HolmesNew York Supreme Court · 1823
- Bennett v. MannixNew York Supreme Court · 1961
- Miller v. WatsonNew York Supreme Court · 1825