History
  • No items yet
midpage
Stoddard v. Holmes
1 Cow. 245
N.Y. Sup. Ct.
1823
Check Treatment
Curia.

By the adjournment of the cause to the 26th August, and the non-attendance of the Justice that day, the pause was discontinued. (West v. Critsinger, 4 John. 117.) The consent of the plaintiff and Stoddard, afterwards, gave the Justice jurisdiction as to them. But the defendant, Geege, did not appear,(a) nor- give his assent to the proceedings. The Justice erred also in admitting the declarations of Geege, who was strictly not a party to the cause, although judgment was rendered against him,

Judgment reversed.

Vid. Hubbard v. Spencer, (15 John. 244,) where the judgment was Rolden void, as against the defendant, for want of authority in Sherrill, who Appeared as attorney, an.d confessed judgment.

Case Details

Case Name: Stoddard v. Holmes
Court Name: New York Supreme Court
Date Published: Aug 15, 1823
Citation: 1 Cow. 245
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.