King v. Shaw
New York Supreme Court
moved to set aside the judgment and execution in this cause; 1. Because, the judgment was entered up on a bond and warrant of attorney, which were forgeries, 2. For irregularity. The bond was dated the 13th of October, 1787, and payable on demand. The warrant of attorney, was dated at the same time, and authorised the attorney to enter up judgment on the bond, “ in term or vacation and the judgment was entered up, in the vacation, as of the preceding term of August.
Read the full summary
moved to set aside the judgment and execution in this cause; 1. Because, the judgment was entered up on a bond and warrant of attorney, which were forgeries, 2. For irregularity. The bond was dated the 13th of October, 1787, and payable on demand. The warrant of attorney, was dated at the same time, and authorised the attorney to enter up judgment on the bond, “ in term or vacation and the judgment was entered up, in the vacation, as of the preceding term of August. As to the irregularity, they cited Strange, 1121. 8 Term, 153. 1 Mod. 1. 7 Mod. 5. Siderfin, 222. 1 Term, 80. 1 Ventris, 113. 1…
1Per curiam
An authority to enter up judgment in vacation, on a bond, payable immediately, will include the vacation in which the bond was given; for the parties must be supposed to mean the present, as well as any future vacation,. There was, then, no breach of good faith, *143"in entering up the judgment, in the August vacation ; and the relation back to the term of August, is a fiction which can prejudice neither the parties nor purchasers, since the judgment is a lien only from the day on which it is docketed. To enter up judgment on a bond, of a term before it was executed or due, is, however, error on…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Albert v. WenderAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1963
- Braddee v. BrownfieldSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1841
- Posey v. UnderwoodCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1833