Case Name: WILLIAM WADE, Paintiff and Respondent, v. ANTHONY DE LEYER, Defendant and Appellant
Court: New York Superior Court General Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1875-08-03
Citations: 8 Jones & S. 541
Docket Number: 
Parties: WILLIAM WADE, Paintiff and Respondent, v. ANTHONY DE LEYER, Defendant and Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Reports of cases argued and determined in the Superior Court of the city of New York
Volume: 40
Pages: 541–542

Head Matter:
WILLIAM WADE, Paintiff and Respondent, v. ANTHONY DE LEYER, Defendant and Appellant.
d opening judgment—
1. Laches.
Where fourteen years had elapsed since the entry of judgment, and defendant had been examined on supplementary proceedings more than four prior to the motion, and no satisfactory excuse or reason for the delay was shown, held that the motion to-open the judgment was properly denied on the ground of laches.
(a) Suit pending for an accounting.
That a suit is pending by the defendant in the judgment against the plaintiff therein for an accounting, and the judgment sought to be opened is claimed to be simply the reduction into that form of collateral securities, constitutes no ground for opening the judgment, but on the contrary shows that there is no ground on which to sustain the motion; as the court in which the accounting suit is pending, can give all the protection which the equities of the case call for.
ID EXECUTION—
1. When lecme of court to issue not required.
When an execution has been issued within five years after entry of the judgment, and returned unsatisfied in whole or in part, a second execution can be issued without leave of the court.
Before Curtis and Sedgwick, JJ.
Heard June, 1875;
Decided August 3, 1875.
D. McMahon and F. Byrne, for appellant.
Charles Blandy, for respondent.

Opinion:
Curtis, J.,
wrote for affirmance, holding above propositions.
Sedgwick, J., concurred.