Monnell v. Weller
New York Supreme Court
These causes came before the court, on writs of cer-tiorari from a justice’s court. The plaintiff below brought actions against the defendants, for penalties under the 12th section of the act for. establishing a turn-Pike> (Raws of New-York, vol. 2. p. 459.) for forcibly passing one of the gates of the turnpike, without ,, Paymg toll.
Read the full summary
These causes came before the court, on writs of cer-tiorari from a justice’s court. The plaintiff below brought actions against the defendants, for penalties under the 12th section of the act for. establishing a turn-Pike> (Raws of New-York, vol. 2. p. 459.) for forcibly passing one of the gates of the turnpike, without ,, Paymg toll. The justice ruled, that the plaintiff should be confined in his proof to the particular day laid in the declaration, an<^ ^10 nonsuited the plaintiff, but awarded no costs, The question which now arose, was, whether a certiorari could be brought to set aside a…
1Per curiam
The returns to the certioraris, in these causes, show that the plaintiff below was nonsuited at the trial, but that no costs have been adjudged against him. The nonsuits were improperly granted, but this court cannot restore the party to the state he was in, when the non-suit took place; and thus it turns out, that the only object in prosecuting these certioraris, is to throw a bill of costs on the defendant. We think the judgment below incomplete, and incapable of reversal or affirmance, and therefore give no judgment.
2Cited by5 opinions
- Beemis v. WylieWisconsin Supreme Court · 1865
- Haulenbeck v. GilliesNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1858
- Blum v. HartmanNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1869
- Nellis v. TuckerNew York Supreme Court · 1847
- Haulenbeck v. GilliesNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1858