Case ID: ny-st-rep_1/html/0570-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Barnard, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

White v. Boice and others.
    
      (Supreme Court, General Term, Second Department,
    
    
      Filed July 23, 1886.)
    
    Practice—Notice oe argument—Irregular notice.
    A respondent is entitled to notice of argument of eight days, but he can. waive by admitting due service. Retention of notice of argument served on December tenth for the fourteenth of the same month is not a waiver of a regular notice.
   Barnard, J.

The respondent was entitled to a notice of argument of eight days. He did not have it. He could waive by admitting due service.

The affidavits show that the respondent did not accept the case, but had returned it as imperfect. The retention of the notice of argument served on the tenth of December for the fourteenth of the same month was not a waiver of a regular notice. Under the circumstances the submission ‘ of the case to the general term was improper. Bowen v. Clark, 2 Wend., 249 ; Pitcher v. Clark, 2 id., 631.

The notice of argument should have been produced on the request of the general term, which was made. If it had been produced there would have been no submission. The general term judgment should have been set aside as a judgment made without jurisdiction.

The special term order should be so made.

Dykman, J., concurs.