Ross v. Hamilton
New York Supreme Court
ErroR. to the Steuben common pleas. Hamilton sued Ross before a justice of the peace, and declared upon a promissory-note made by the defendant to David Bunn or bearer, April 12, 1841, for $20, payable 1st January, 1842, with interest.
Read the full summary
ErroR. to the Steuben common pleas. Hamilton sued Ross before a justice of the peace, and declared upon a promissory-note made by the defendant to David Bunn or bearer, April 12, 1841, for $20, payable 1st January, 1842, with interest. The defendant pleaded the general issue; “ also that the defendant by due course of law applied for and obtained the discharge copy of which is annexed in substance upon full compliance with the law of the United States in all respects and the rules and practice of the court that granted the same,” annexing a copy of the discharge certified by the clerk of the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Morehouse, J.
Tested by technical rules it is quite clear that the defendant’s plea of discharge as a bankrupt, before the justice, did not contain all that was necessary to make it good in form or substance. It was sufficient for the substantial purpose of apprizing the party of the real ground of defence; and it appears he was satisfied with its import, because he interposed no demurrer calling for greater accuracy or precision. Great latitude is allowed in proceedings before justices of the peace ; and courts construe them liberally. (Chamberlin v. Graves, 2 Hill, 504. Whitney…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Depuy v. SwartNew York Supreme Court · 1829
- Shippey v. HendersonNew York Supreme Court · 1817
- Dean v. GridleyNew York Supreme Court · 1833
- Fitch v. MillerNew York Supreme Court · 1834
3Cited by2 opinions
- Totman v. DrakeNew York County Court, Chautauqua County · 1906
- Totman v. Drake, New York County Courts1906