New York Supreme Court, 1800

Sealy v. Shattuck

Sealy v. Shattuck
New York Supreme Court · Decided October 15, 1800
2 Johns. Cas. 69
Sealy v. Shattuck

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

The plaintiff ought to have applied for the effect of his rule, at the next term, after notice of it was proved. Having slept so long, he must be presumed to have waived it. The motion must be denied.

Motion denied.(a)

(a) See n. b. to Sheldon v. McEvers, sup. vol. 1, p. 69. Oppie v. Colgrove, 19 Johns. R. 124. Burr v. Waterman, 18 id. 508. 2 Grah. Prac. 2d ed. 955.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.