Legal Opinion

Ford v. Babcock

Court for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors

Decided May 15, 1845PublishedCited by 18 opinions

Demurrer to plea. Ford declared against Babcock in an action of trover for books, wearing apparel, &c. The defendant Babcock pleaded, 1. Not - guilty.; 2. That the plaintiff ought not to have or maintain, &c. because, &c. before the commencement of this suit, to wit, on, &c. the “ said defendant under and by virtue of the act to abolish- imprisonment for debt and to punish fraudulent debtors, passed April 26th, 1831, commenced a suit in the marine court of the city of…

Read the full summary

Demurrer to plea. Ford declared against Babcock in an action of trover for books, wearing apparel, &c. The defendant Babcock pleaded, 1. Not - guilty.; 2. That the plaintiff ought not to have or maintain, &c. because, &c. before the commencement of this suit, to wit, on, &c. the “ said defendant under and by virtue of the act to abolish- imprisonment for debt and to punish fraudulent debtors, passed April 26th, 1831, commenced a suit in the marine court of the city of New-York by a writ of attachment issued out of the said court against the goods, chattels and effects of the said plaintiff;”…

1Opinion of the Court

By the Court, Beardsley, J.

If the marine court of the city of New-York may proceed by attachment, (a point‘I have not looked at,) still this plea is palpably bad. That Court has but a special and limited jurisdiction, both as to cases and parties ; and whoever sets up its authority, in a case instituted by *159himself, must show that the case was one of which the court had complete jurisdiction. To this rule there is no exception. (Jones v. Reed, 1 John. Cas. 20 ; Service v. Hermance, 1 John. R. 91; Roosevelt v. Kellogg, 20 id. 208.)

This plea was not prepared upon any such principle, nor indeed…

2Cited by18 opinions

  1. Wightman v. KarsnerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1852
  2. State ex rel. Gordon v. HopkinsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1885
  3. Clark v. NortonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1861
  4. Dick v. WilsonOregon Supreme Court · 1883
  5. Beaudrias v. HoganAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1897

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

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

Powered by the Exa API