Montelius v. Montelius
Philadelphia Court of Nisi Prius
This case arose on a rule to show cause why a judgment entered on a bond and warrant of attorney, and the execution issued thereon, should not be set aside.
Read the full summary
This case arose on a rule to show cause why a judgment entered on a bond and warrant of attorney, and the execution issued thereon, should not be set aside. The decision requires that the bond and warrant should be given at length, as follows: Know all men by these presents, that I, Marcus Montelius, tobacconist, of the city of Philadelphia, am held and firmly bound unto William Montelius, the elder, merchant, of the said city, in the sum of $6000, of good and lawful money of the United States, to be paid to the said William Montelius, Sen., or his certain attorney, executors, administrators…
1Opinion of the CourtSergeant, J.
— (After consulting with Mr. Justice Kennedy, who came into court at the close of the argument,) pronounced his decision as follows: — The first objection which has been taken to the judgment is, that it was entered without a declaration having been filed, according to the terms of the warrant, which is of an anomalous character, as it and the bond are incorporated together, and form in fact but one instrument. But I think that a strict compliance with such a clause in a warrant of attorney accompanying a bond, has been dispensed with by the act of 24th February, 1806. The 28th section of…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Adams v. BushSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1836
- Longstreth & Cook v. GraySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1832
3Cited by1 opinion
- Teel v. . YostNew York Court of Appeals · 1891