Andrews v. Montgomery
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action of assumpsit, on a judgment recovered against the defendants, in January, 1815, in the Court of Common Pleas of the county of Essex, in the state of New-Jersey.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of assumpsit, on a judgment recovered against the defendants, in January, 1815, in the Court of Common Pleas of the county of Essex, in the state of New-Jersey. The declaration contained four counts : the first wag Specja¡¡y on the judgment, stating the promise to have j>een ma¿[e u ¡n the said county of Essex, in the state of New-Jersey, to wit: at the city, and in the county of New-The other counts were York,” where the venue was laid . the common money counts. 1 he defendant, M., who alone appeared, pleaded, 1. Non-assumpsit; 2. A discharge on the21st of June, 1815,…
1Opinion of the Court
Spencer, Ch. J.
delivered the opinion of the Court. In Hitchcock v. Fitch & Aicken, (1 Caines’ Rep. 461.) it was decided, by a majority of the Judges, that a judgment rendered in the Supreme Court of Vermont, and on which an action of debt was brought in this Court, was to be considered in the light of a foreign judgment, and was only prima facie evidence of the demand. As a necessary consequence of this decision, judgments rendered in one of the sister states were considered only as simple contract debts. (Hubbel v. Cowdry, 5 Johns. Rep. 132.) It was subsequently decided, that in order to…
2Cited by38 opinions
- Milwaukee County v. M. E. White Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1935
- Bank of North America v. WheelerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1859
- In Re the Application for Letters of Administration of the Goods, Chattels and CreditsNew York Court of Appeals · 1898
- Wyman v. MitchellNew York Supreme Court · 1823
- President of the Bank of the United States v. Merchants Bank of BaltimoreCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1848
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.