Case ID: ny_73/html/0615-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Mary R. Hunt, Respondent, v. Richard Church et al., Executors, etc., Appellants.
    (Argued April 16, 1878;
    
    decided April 23, 1878.)
    
      George F. Danforth for appellant.
    
      J. B. Adams for respondent.
   Agree to affirm on opinion of Special Term.

All concur.

Judgment affirmed.

A motion was subsequently made for a reargument, on the ground that a point was omitted on the argument which would have been fatal to the judgment, to wit: That the action was against the representatives of a deceased surety upon a joint obligation, and that his estate was not liable. The court denied the motion, on the ground that if a reargument was had it would be upon the original record, in which there was no exception raising the point; and so, it could not be considered.

The case of Risley v. Brown (67 N. Y., 160), distinguished; as there, a motion was made to revive the action against the personal representatives of a deceased defendant, which motion was opposed on the ground presented here, and the question was fairly before the court on the motion.

All concur.

Motion denied.