General

Samuel Bayard v. Samuel B. and Richard M. Malcolm

1 Cole. & Cai. Cas. 456·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

Samuel Bayard v. Samuel B. and Richard M. Malcolm. THE notice of motion was not for the first day of term. Munro accounted for this by an affidavit, stating that he had absolutely forgotten the day on which the term commenced, imagining it to be one week later than it realty was. Harison, contra, objected to the reception of this excuse, as Mr. Towt was the attorney on the record, therefore for him the forgetfulness of Mr. Munro could afford no excuse. [MAJORITY — Per Curiam.] Per Curiam. There can be no doubt of the mistake, nor but that the whole is in good faith. Though Mr. Towt appears the attorney on record, every one knows the connexion between him and Mr. Munro. He is to be supposed to act only under the direction of Mr. Munro.