Legal Opinion

Baird v. Pridmore

New York Supreme Court

Decided June 15, 1866PublishedCited by 1 opinion

This action was commenced before a justice of the peace, by service of a summons issued by the justice, and commanding the defendant to appear before said justice to answer the complaint of the plaintiff to his damage of two hundred dollars or under; Ho revenue stamp, under the statute of the United States, was attached to said summons at any time.

Read the full summary

This action was commenced before a justice of the peace, by service of a summons issued by the justice, and commanding the defendant to appear before said justice to answer the complaint of the plaintiff to his damage of two hundred dollars or under; Ho revenue stamp, under the statute of the United States, was attached to said summons at any time. The defendant failed to appear before the justice, and the plaintiff recovered a judgment from which the defendant appealed to ¡the county court of Livingston county, upon the ground that the summons issued by the justice was irregular and void by…

1Opinion of the Court

By the court, E. Darwin Smith, J.

It was the intent, I think, of the 151st section, act of congress of 1864, entitled “ an act to provide internal revenue for the support of the government,” to impose a stamp duty of 50 cents upon all writs, summons and other original process by which a suit was commenced in any court of record, and also of the same amount upon any writ, process or summons in a justices’ court, or other court not of record, for the recovery of any sum exceeding $100.

Construing together' all the provisions in the schedule B annexed to said act and referred to in said section…

2Cited by1 opinion

  1. Cole v. BellNew York Supreme Court · 1866

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API