Colby v. Dow
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Trespass. The defendant craved oyer of the writ and return, and they were set out. He then enrolled the summons and prayed judgment of the writ, and that the same may be abated, because the summons delivered to him by the officer who served the writ did not give him briefly the same information which the declaration gave, &e., but was defectivo in that “ it did not state what plea, or kind of action, said Rufus Dow was required to answer to,” &c.
Read the full summary
Trespass. The defendant craved oyer of the writ and return, and they were set out. He then enrolled the summons and prayed judgment of the writ, and that the same may be abated, because the summons delivered to him by the officer who served the writ did not give him briefly the same information which the declaration gave, &e., but was defectivo in that “ it did not state what plea, or kind of action, said Rufus Dow was required to answer to,” &c. The plaintiff thereupon reenrolled the writ and return, and demurred, for causes — 1. That by said original writ the sheriff or his deputy is…
1Opinion of the CourtGilchrist, J.
The pleadings are not enrolled by the defendant with perfect clerical accuracy. In some instances the copy is not perfectly correct, but they are not such that the matter fails by reason of them to be easily Intel*558ligible. It is just as plain as if the enrollment had been perfectly accurate.
In the original, the sheriff' is required to make return “or” the writ. In the enrollment, the word is correctly written, “of.”
In the original, the return states that the property of the “ detenant” was attached. In the enrollment the word “ defendant” is used.
It is often said that pleas in abatement are…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Goodall v. DurginSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1844