Ex parte Green v. Oneida Common Pleas
New York Supreme Court
A suit was commenced in the Oneida common pleas by the relator against one White, by the filing of a declaration» White’s domicil was in the county of Oneida, but he was engaged at the time in the building of a house in the county of Madison, where a copy of the declaration was served upon him. Upon this service a default was entered, judgment obtained, and execution issued.
Read the full summary
A suit was commenced in the Oneida common pleas by the relator against one White, by the filing of a declaration» White’s domicil was in the county of Oneida, but he was engaged at the time in the building of a house in the county of Madison, where a copy of the declaration was served upon him. Upon this service a default was entered, judgment obtained, and execution issued. On the motion of White, all proceedings in the suit subsequent to the filing of the declaration, were set aside by the common pleas for irregularity. Green asked for a mandamus, directing the common pleas to vacate the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Savage, Ch. J.
The common pleas did right in setting aside the proceedings. Where a suit is commenced in the common pleas of one county, the declaration cannot be served in another county. The provision in the statute that the service of a declaration may be by a sheriff, and that he may be ruled to return it, Laws of 1833, p. 394, § 2, implies ¡that the service is to be in the county in the court of which *593the declaration is filed. A declaration in a suit .commenced by declaration is analogous to process, and process in a suit commenced in the common pleas of one county cannot be…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Shepard v. WrightNew York Supreme Court · 1880
- Stevens v. StevensNew York Surrogate's Court · 1878