Hamersly v. Brown

Decided April 9, 1817

New York Court of Chancery · decided 1817-04-09

PETITION to enlarge publication, for six weeks, to examine witnesses. The petition admitted that publication had passed, but an affidavit accompanied the petition, that the depositions taken had not been read.

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently October 1898

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1817-04-09

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

The Chancellor

¶1[ *429 ]

¶2denied the motion, for want of notice to the plaintiff’s solicitor. Such a rule, after publication *has already passed, is not to be granted without due notice to the opposite party; for it is not a rule of course, and must be founded on special circumstances.

¶3Motion denied.