General
Nicholas Low v. Jacob W. Hallett
1 Cole. & Cai. Cas. 432·New York Supreme Court·1805·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Nicholas Low v. Jacob W. Hallett.
EMOTT, on the common affidavit, that the trial of this cause would require the examination of long accounts, moved for a reference.
Hoffman, contra,
read an affidavit by the plaintiff, simply stating,- that as he was advised by his counsel, and Verily believed,- the controversy would necessarily involve questions of law.
Mmott, in reply,
submitted to the court whether the affidavit ought not to have specified what those questions of law were.
See Lusher v. Water, ante, p. 206.
[MAJORITY — Thompson, J. Per Curiam.]
Thompson, J.
I believe the usual mode has been to state them.
Per Curiam.
The addition of “ as advised by counsel,” is sufficient. It is to be presumed, that counsel would not advise, unless there was some foundation. Take nothing by your motion, and pay the costs of resisting.