History
  • No items yet
midpage
Platt v. Walworth
3 Wend. 311
N.Y. Sup. Ct.
1829
Check Treatment

By the Court,

Marcy, J.

The notice was properly engrossed on the nisi prius roll, and the plaintiff is entitled to i . . i . i .ii r. _ * . . charge it in his bill of costs. But there was no necessity for *312engrossing it on the judgment roll, and for that there should not ge an a]fowance. It is said it may be important it should be engrossed on the judgment roll, to shew the pertinency of exceptions taken at the circuit to the admission or rejection of testimony. For this purpose, it may be necessary it should be spread out in the bill of exceptions, but it need not appear 'on the record of judgment. What is said on this subject in 4 Cowen, 546, applies more properly to the nisi prius roll than to the judgment record.

Case Details

Case Name: Platt v. Walworth
Court Name: New York Supreme Court
Date Published: Oct 15, 1829
Citation: 3 Wend. 311
Court Abbreviation: N.Y. Sup. 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.