Grant v. White
GRANT v. WHITE
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Solomon Heydenfeldt (author)
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion — Heydenfeldt
Mr. Justice Heydenfeldt delivered the opinion of the Court.
Mr. Chief Justice Murray concurred.
The only point raised by the Bill of Exceptions is the want of proper notice by defendant’s counsel of the time for argument of the motion for a new trial. The notice, it seems, was served on Mr. Kewen after *56his connection with the case had ceased, and the defence of it had heen turned over to Mr. Crockett. To avail the defendant of this objection, there should have been a regular substitution of counsel in the mode pointed out by the statute.
There is no statement of the case which will enable us to consider the other assignments of error. Judgment affirmed.
Cited by
- People v. Bouchard Crim. 6138 · 1957-11-22
- Sherman v. Panno Civ. 20313 · 1954-12-06
- Reynolds v. Reynolds L. A. 17925 · 1943-02-16
- Abrahms v. Stokes No. 2,213 · 1870-07-01