Jackson ex dem. Rosekrans v. Stiles
New York Supreme Court
This was an action of ejectment, brought to recover lands to which the tehant derived title under the state. The declaration, &c. had been duly served on the tenant, and by him delivered to the Attorney-General on the 14th of April last.
Read the full summary
This was an action of ejectment, brought to recover lands to which the tehant derived title under the state. The declaration, &c. had been duly served on the tenant, and by him delivered to the Attorney-General on the 14th of April last. The notice was of course for the last May term, and the consent rule and plea were, immediately afterwards, drawn and forwarded to a clerk in the office of the clerk of this court in Albany, directed to the attorney for the plaintiff, who the Attorney-General believed to reside in or near Albany. The consent rule and plea were duly received, but, from…
1Per curiam
The proceedings on the part of the defendant certainly have not been perfectly regular, for they ought, in strictness, to have been sent to the agent of the plaintiff’s attorney. It appears, however, that every measure necessary for the defence was actually taken, though from an idea on one hand of the clerk of the defendant’s attorney, that the plaintiff resided near Albany, and a mistake on the other, in the office of the clerk of the court, the papers never reached their proper destination. In ejectment, as it is the creature of the court, every thing will be done to promote the justice of…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Jackson ex dem. Mentz v. StilesNew York Supreme Court · 1809
- Klinefelter's Lessee v. CareyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1831