Stitt v. Cass
New York Supreme Court
In Equity. This was a creditor’s suit. The bill' set forth the recovery of ^ judgment in the New-York common pleas, in March, 1847, for $9727,45 in favor of the plaintiffs in this suit, against the defendants Cass, Ward & Conover, as joint debtors, upon service of process on Cass & Conover.
Read the full summary
In Equity. This was a creditor’s suit. The bill' set forth the recovery of ^ judgment in the New-York common pleas, in March, 1847, for $9727,45 in favor of the plaintiffs in this suit, against the defendants Cass, Ward & Conover, as joint debtors, upon service of process on Cass & Conover. A fi. fa. was issued on that judgment on the 15th of April, 1847, with an endorsement thereon directing the sheriff to levy $7789,47 on the joint property of the defendants and on the property of Cass & Conover only. The fi. fa. was returned on the 15th of June, 1847, nulla bona. Previous to the recovery…
1Opinion of the CourtEdwards, J.
There is no valid objection to the defence set up, on the mere ground that it was not made in the suit at law. It is admitted by the complainants that at the time when the cognovit was given, upon which the judgment at law was entered up, the defendants were ignorant of the compromise which had been made with Ward, and that the complainants did not inform them of it, although aware of their ignorance.
With the views which I have taken of this case I do not think it necessary to examine the preliminary question whether Mead was authorized by the complainant to execute the release, which was…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Wimer v. SmithOregon Supreme Court · 1892