Van Sickler v. Jacobs
New York Supreme Court
IN ERROR, on certiorari to a justice’s court. The plaintiff in error brought an action of trespass da bonis asportatis, in the court below, against the defendant, in error. The defendant justified under a warrant of distress for rent, and judgment was rendered in his favour.
Read the full summary
IN ERROR, on certiorari to a justice’s court. The plaintiff in error brought an action of trespass da bonis asportatis, in the court below, against the defendant, in error. The defendant justified under a warrant of distress for rent, and judgment was rendered in his favour. The objections presented, on the return to the certiorari, were, 1. That the warrant of distress was proved by parol evidence only, whereas it ought to have been produced on the trial. 2. That the distress was illegal, because it appeared that among the articles distrained, there were one copper tea-kettle, one tin oven,…
1Per curiam
The first objection cannot avail, because no exception to the parol evidence of the warrant was made at the trial. The witness who swore to the warrant, may, for any thing that appears, have had it in his pocket, ready to be produced if it had been required.(a) As to the second objection, the act of the 18th of April, 1815, (sess. 38. c. 227. p. 231.) declares, that “ necessary cooking utensils, owned by any person being a householder, shall be exempted from execution and distress for rent.” In this case, it appears that the plaintiff was a householder; but it does not appear that any of the…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Prosser v. SecorNew York Supreme Court · 1849
- Baker v. BrintrallNew York Supreme Court · 1868
- Griffin v. SutherlandNew York Supreme Court · 1852
- Dains v. ProsserNew York Supreme Court · 1860
- Willson v. EllisCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1845
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.