McMahon v. Perkins
Supreme Court of Rhode Island
Trespass and Ejectment, This action was commenced "by the plaintiff to recover premises sold under execution in an action. against the daughter of the plaintiff joined with her husband on the antenuptial debt of the daughter. The plaintiff claimed under a deed from her daughter. The judgment-roll of the District Court, printed in blank, showed that the letter ‘£ s ” had been omitted after the word defendant in the blank. The further facts in the case appear from the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtStiness, J.
The plaintiff claims that the defendant’s title, based upon an attachment sale, is void.(1) First. Because the affidavit on the writ was defective. The action was brought against husband and wife for an antenuptial debt of the wife. The affidavit stated that the plaintiff had a claim against the defendant, instead of defendants. The plaintiff claims that the use of the singular instead of the plural number made the affidavit void, because it did not comply with the statute, Pub. Stat. cap. 206, § 12, and did not aver a claim against both defendants.
The affidavit, in this respect, conforms…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Stearns v. HemenwayMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1894
3Cited by2 opinions
- Smith v. City Nat. Bank of Wichita FallsCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1911
- Smith v. City Nat. Bank of Wichita FallsCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1911