Legal Opinion

Cramer v. Van Alstyne

New York Supreme Court

Decided October 15, 1812PublishedCited by 11 opinions

RIKER, for the plaintiff, moved to amend the ca. sa. on file, in this case, by striking out the return day, the 16th August, and insertiug the 15th August, it having been made returnable, by mistake, out of term. He cited 4 Burr. 1187. 1 Cromp. Prac. 368. 1 Salk. 273. 1 Ld. Raym. 775, 776. 3 Wils. 341. 1 Johns. Cas. 31. 5 Johns. Rep. 163.

1Per curiam

The case of Campbell v. Gumming (2 Burr. 1187.) is in point. Where an exec.ulion is returnable out of term, it is not void, though liable to be set aside, on motion, for irregularity. It may, therefore, be amended, though it would be otherwise as to mesne process. We grant the rule to amend, on payment of costs.

Motion granted.

2Cited by11 opinions

Sharman v. HuotMontana Supreme Court · 1898
Whitney v. BrunetteWisconsin Supreme Court · 1862
Jones v. CookNew York Supreme Court · 1823
Williams v. HogeboomNew York Court of Chancery · 1840
Wilson v. HustonCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1816

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.