History
  • No items yet
midpage
In re Collins
6 Dem. Sur. 286
N.Y. Sur. Ct.
1887
Check Treatment
The Surrogate.

I must deny the motion for a new hearing herein. I am not entirely satisfied that, by the exercise of reasonable diligence, the respondent’s attorney might not, before trial, have discovered the evidence upon which he now relies. And, besides, he does not present the affidavits of the persons from whom he expects the additional testimony or show why he has failed so to do. This circumstance is of itself fatal to his application (Shumway v. Fowler, 4 *287Johns., 425; Denn v. Morrell, 1 Hall, 382; Sheppard v. Sheppard, 5 Hals., 250; Smith v. Cushing, 18 Wisc., 295; Gould v. Moore, 40 N. Y. Sup’r., 387; Arnold v. Skaggs, 35 Cal., 684; Cowan v. Smith, 35 Ill., 416; Bright v. Wilson, 7 B. Mon., 122).

Case Details

Case Name: In re Collins
Court Name: New York Surrogate's Court
Date Published: Sep 15, 1887
Citation: 6 Dem. Sur. 286
Court Abbreviation: N.Y. Sur. Ct.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.