Filkins v. Brockway
New York Supreme Court
MOTION to set aside the certiorari which had been allowed in this case, on the ground that the seal affixed to the writ had been detached from process to which it had been before affixed, and -again affixed to this writ. The affidavit of the attorney who sued out the certiorari, stated, that the -seal had been taken from a capias ad respondendum, which liad been filled up, but never delivered to the sheriff.
1Opinion of the Court
Per'¡Curiam.
We deny the motion, without costs; but we think proper to lay down this-general rule, in future : that a seal which has been used by heitig affixed to anypto■cess which has been filled up, whether such process has «been-delivered to the sheriff or not, carinbt be again used, vor «attached to another writ. It "is functus officio, ahfrtt).hilow it tobe again used, would lead to improper practices, and be a fraud on the ‘cletfk?s office. Wé intend to«put a *171Stdp to a practice sd inc'dfrect, in this respect, arid shall set Aside aity writ hr procéss to Which Such A seal shall bé so…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Lessee of Boal v. KingOhio Supreme Court · 1833