Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

1 Cole. & Cai. Cas. 119

Van Patten v. Ouderkirk

New York Supreme Court

Decided October 15, 1800

New York Supreme Court · decided 1800-10-15

ON Certiorari. JEmott, in behalf of the justice, moved to quash the writ, .because it required him, among other things, to return the testimony. It was admitted that no notice had been given the opposite party, but it was contended that none was necessary.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently December 1840

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1800-10-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Per Curiam.

¶1This writ is the right of the party who takes it out, and the justice is bound to obey it. *120at his peril. He is not, however, bound to return anything but what we can legally require of him, notwithstanding the command expressed in the writ. In this case he ought to return all but the testimony, and to take no notice of that part of the precept which enjoins him to return that.

¶2Motion denied.

/1/colecaicas/119 · .json · Public domain