Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

14 Abb. Pr. 228

Bortle v. Mellen

New York Supreme Court

Decided February 15, 1862

New York Supreme Court · decided 1862-02-15

This was an action by Richard Bortle and another against William H. Mellen and another, upon a bond given on the discharge of a steamboat from attachment. The cause was tried before a referee, who rendered judgment for the plaintiffs. The defendants’ counsel procured various extensions to serve exceptions, until sixty days after notice of the entry of judgment.

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently April 1888

2 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1862-02-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Leonard, J.

¶1The case of Beach a. Gregory (2 Abbotts’ Pr., 203; and 3 Ib., 78) is authority adverse to the defendants’ motion. On the other hand, Sheldon a. Wood (14 How. Pr., 18) is a case in which the right to permit exceptions to be filed after the time allowed by section 272 of the Code has expired, was exercised by the Superior Court.

¶2The true construction of section 174 warrants the exercise of such 'authority in the discretion of the court.

¶3*229Iri the present case the time to file exceptions was permitted by the defendants to elapse, after it had been extended by consent for several weeks beyond the time required by the Code.

¶4I think no satisfactory excuse has been offered for this neglect, or for the neglect since occurring in not moving.

¶5Without exceptions the appeal will not serve to obtain a review of the decision, and will not result in any practical utility to the defendant in procuring relief from the judgment.

¶6The omission of the sureties to justify has been perhaps sufficiently excused; but it would be useless to permit the sureties to justify, and withhold the relief asked for in respect to the serving and filing case and exceptions.

¶7The motion is denied without costs.

/14/abbpr/228 · .json · Public domain