Shufelt v. Cramer

Decided October 15, 1822

New York Supreme Court · decided 1822-10-15

IN ERROR, on certiorari to a Justice’s Court. Shufelt was plaintiff below/and proceeded by summons, on the return of which, issue was joined. The cause was adjourned until the 14th of January, at 2 o’clock, P. M. The defendants appeared according to the adjournment, and were ready to proceed.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1822-10-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently January 1893

1 district · 2 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Per Curiam.

¶1The Justice was bound to wait a reasonable time for the appearance of the parties. No case has yet decided what shall be considered a reasonable time. We think, however, that waiting a full hour after the time appointed, is giving a sufficient and reasonable time for the appearance of either party. This is in conformity to the practice on a summons to show cause before a Judge. We are of opinion, that, as a general rule, the Justice must wait an hour for the appearance of the parties, and that he need wait no longer, unless some excuse which he shall deem reasonable, be shown, for giving further indulgence. In the *310present case, there was no excuse for not appearing at the end of the hour after the time appointed.

¶2Judgment affirmed.