Court Opinion

ID: 6143382
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-02-05 14:46:19.898765+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:54:44.982406
License: Public Domain

By the Court,
Nelson, Ch. J.
The affidavit was defective in not pursuing the language of the rule, (22 Wend. 644,)(a), and the motion must therefore be denied.
Ordered accordingly.

 See Fitzburgh v. Truax, (1 Hill, 644, and note;) also Calder v. Lansing, (id. 212;) Richmond v. Cowles, (2 id. 359;) and the note to Britian v. Peabody, ante, p. 64, 5.