Underhill v. Van Cortlandt
Underhill v. Van Cortlandt
1 Johns. Ch. 500; 1815 N.Y. LEXIS 164; 1815 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 38
Opinion of the Court
The motion to enlarge -publication is not of course, but the circumstances of delay are not sufficiently strong to induce a refusal of it, altogether, in this case. To enlarge the rule for publication, only until the present plaintiffs shall have sufficiently answered the cross-bill, puts it in their power to put an end to the delay, at any time, and to bring on their cause to a hearing.
Motion granted.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.