Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

5 Cow. 423

Anonymous

New York Supreme Court

Decided May 15, 1826

New York Supreme Court · decided 1826-05-15

<p>The excuse for not noticing a motion for the 1st day of ¡^¡vé’n’hi affidavits served.</p> <p>To warrant denying a ref-ground °“ that questions of law will anse, tho court must be satisfied ¡tcf1 Cuestiona of real difficu1t>‘</p>

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1826-05-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently June 1875

3 state decisions

10182618301840185018601870decided

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 constant practice is otherwise. The excuse is for the court, not for the party; and may De shown at the time of moving.

¶2Emmet then read an affidavit, showing that certain questions of law would arise before the referees, specifying them. These would arise under the plea of the statute of limitations.

*424Curia.

¶3The questions which you stale are of easy soluqon_ Questions of law may, and to a certain extent, must arise on every reference. We must be' satisfied, however, that they are questions of real difficulty, to warrant our denying a reference on this ground. The doctrine of evidence upon the plea of the statute of limitations, is, in general, very well settled.

¶4Motion denied.

/5/cow/423 · .json · Public domain