Dunning v. Humphrey
New York Supreme Court
Demurrer to plea. The plaintiff declared on an attachment bond executed by Humphrey and Clark, on the commencement of a suit in a justice’s court, by Humphrey against Dunning. The bond was conditioned among other things that if Humphrey should pay to Dunning, all the damages and costs which he might sustain, by reason of the issuing of the attachment, if Humphrey should fail to recover judgment in the suit, then, &c.
Read the full summary
Demurrer to plea. The plaintiff declared on an attachment bond executed by Humphrey and Clark, on the commencement of a suit in a justice’s court, by Humphrey against Dunning. The bond was conditioned among other things that if Humphrey should pay to Dunning, all the damages and costs which he might sustain, by reason of the issuing of the attachment, if Humphrey should fail to recover judgment in the suit, then, &c. The plaintiff averred that an attachment was issued, by virtue whereof his goods and chattels, to the value of $300, were attached and kept and detained for the space of sixty…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Nelson, Ch. J.
The plea is bad, as the action is brought for the recovery of unliquidated damages. Besides the costs of defending the attachment suit, the plaintiff here is entitled to such damages as a jury may think he has sustained by the wrongful seizing and detaining [ *32 ] of his property. If it was taken out of his pessession, he may *be entitled to the value of it; if seized and left in hia possession, to such damages as may be awarded for the unlawful intermeddling with the property.
Judgment for plaintiff.
2Cited by2 opinions
- Harris v. FinbergTexas Supreme Court · 1876
- Reynolds v. HosmerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1873