Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

9 Wend. 493

Pelletreau v. Moore

New York Supreme Court

Decided March 15, 1833

New York Supreme Court · decided 1833-03-15

A verdict having been obtained by the plaintiff the defendant obtained an order to stay proceedings until the settlement of a bill of exceptions. The bill was settled on the seventh day of March. On the eighth, the plaintiff not having been served with a further order to stay, signed judgment.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently June 1853

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1833-03-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1By the Court,

Savage, Ch. J.

¶2The question is, had the judge’s order for the settlement of the bill expired on the eighth day of March? Had the bill been settled within the meaning of the order ? After settlement, the plaintiff is regular, under the act of 1832, Laws of 1832, p. 188, in perfecting his judgment and issuing execution, unless a new order is granted. Here, however, the bill cannot be considered as settled until the eleventh of March. The party tendering a bill should have a reasonable time after settlement to incorporate the amendments, and engross the bill for the signature of the judge; until signed, it is subject to modification by him, and therefore unsettled. Previous to the signature of the judge, and consequently before the bill was settled, the judgment was entered, which was a violation of the first order to stay. The plaintiff was irregular and the judgment is set aside.

/9/wend/493 · .json · Public domain