General
Cornell vs. Allen and Talmadge
1 Cole. Cas. 70·New York Supreme Court·1799·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
Cornell vs. Allen and Talmadge.
[MAJORITY]
MOTION to have Judgment of Non-fuit for not bringing on the Caufe to Trial, fet afide.
The Suit was again ft the Defendants. jointly, on a promiffory Note. Talmadge only was brought in, and he employed an Attorney. The Note was afterwards, by Agreement between Allen and a third Perfon, taken up, and the Coils paid by that Perfon to the Plaintiff's Attorney. The Attorney employed by Talmadge, notwith-ftanding he was informed by the Plaintiff's Attorney, that the Note was fo taken up, and the Coils 'paid, filed a Plea, the general Iffue, and ferved a Copy on the Plaintiff's Attorney; and in a fubfequent Term, after there had been a Circuit in the County, obtained the above Rule for Judgment of Nonfuit.
Judgment fet afide; and the Attorney employed by Talmadge ordered to pay to the Plaintiff's Attorney the Coils of this Motion.