Harlow v. Hamilton
New York Supreme Court
This action was commenced in October last by summons and complaint.- The plaintiff claims to be the owner of two judgments against Alfred Hamilton, recovered in 1851, on which execution against the real and personal property of the said Alfred had been returned by the sheriff of Saratoga county, nulla bona, &c.
Read the full summary
This action was commenced in October last by summons and complaint.- The plaintiff claims to be the owner of two judgments against Alfred Hamilton, recovered in 1851, on which execution against the real and personal property of the said Alfred had been returned by the sheriff of Saratoga county, nulla bona, &c. It alleges that before these judgments were obtained, Alfred Hamilton in 1850, with a view of placing his property beyond the reach of his creditors, conveyed it all to the defendant Moore, who immediately thereafter .conveyed it to Ann Maria, the wife of defendant, Alfred Hamilton.…
1Opinion of the Court
Willard, Justice.
There can be no doubt that a considerable part of the complaint is irrelevant and redundant matter, and would have been stricken out on a proper motion. It was entirely unnecessary to set out the record of judgment at length. The record is merely evidence. Nothing more was required as a pleading than to set forth the rendition of the judgment, the time when it was recovered, and the amount, with the averment of jurisdiction. But the defendants answered over, and therefore can not raise this objection.
The 160th section of the Code, which provides for striking out irrelevant…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Staten Island Midland Railroad v. HinchcliffeNew York Supreme Court · 1901
- Doughty v. PallissardNew York Supreme Court · 1938
- Littlejohn v. GreeleyNew York Supreme Court · 1861