Valkenburgh v. Dederick

Decided July 15, 1799

New York Supreme Court · decided 1799-07-15

This cause was at issue in July vacation, 1798, and an inquest by default was regularly taken against the defendant early in July, 1799, on which a rule for judgment had been entered at this term. The defendant obtained a discharge under the act for giving relief in cases of insolvency, on the 9th February last, and being surrendered by his bail, moved to be discharged from custody, and that the proceedings against him subsequent to his discharge might be set aside.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently May 1870

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1799-07-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Per Curiam.

¶1The defendant has shown no reason why he did not give his discharge in evidence, or plead it puis ■ dar. cont. and having neglected to make his proper defence, we will not interfere to help him.

¶2In an ordinary case, and with a, more meritorious defence, the court would not relieve after so great a laches.(a)

¶3Rule refused.

¶4 Cross v. Hobson, 2 Caines’ R. 102. Ackerman v. Van Houton, 5 Halstead, 332. Mechanics’ Bank v. Hazard, 9 Johns. R. 392. And see Cost v. Riley, 18 id. 54 ; and Desobry v. Morange, id. 336.