From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Blydenburgh v. Cotheal

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Dec 1, 1850
4 N.Y. 418 (N.Y. 1850)

Opinion

December Term, 1850

B.W. Bonney, for the respondent.

J.W. Blydenburgh, in person, opposed the motion.


As a general rule the court does not inquire into the fractions of a day, except for the purpose of guarding against injustice. ( Small v. McChesney, 3 Cowen, 19. Clute v. Clute, 3 Denio, 263.) We think that a sufficient answer to this motion.

Motion denied


Summaries of

Blydenburgh v. Cotheal

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Dec 1, 1850
4 N.Y. 418 (N.Y. 1850)
Case details for

Blydenburgh v. Cotheal

Case Details

Full title:BLYDENBURGH vs . COTHEAL

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Dec 1, 1850

Citations

4 N.Y. 418 (N.Y. 1850)

Citing Cases

United States v. Norton

Where the ends of justice require it, or conflicting interests are involved, the law will look into the…

Pooley v. City of Buffalo

The general rule is that fractions of a day will not be regarded in law, except for the purpose of preventing…