2 Johns. 104
Decided November 15, 1806
New York Supreme Court · decided 1806-11-15
Slosson moved to set aside the default and subsequent proceedings in this cause. The bill was served on the defendant the 12th day of September, and on the same day he obtained a judge’s order for enlarging the time' . . .. tor pleading. A written notice of the order was duly served on the agent of the plaintiff’s attorney.
Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently December 1909
2 state decisions
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1806-11-15
View the full empirical analysis of this case →
¶1The serving of a notice of a judge’s order is not sufficient; a copy of the order, at least, ought' to have been served.. But as there appears to have been a misapprehension about the practice in this case, the defendant may taire his rule, on payment of costs ; with liberty to the plaintiff to change the venue if he think’ proper ; and if the venue be changed to the city and county of New York, that then the defendant take short notice of trial, which is four days.
¶2Rule granted.