Legal Opinion

Claflin v. Sanger

New York Supreme Court

Decided February 15, 1860Published

Appeal from an order setting aside a judgment. • Andrew S. Stone and others recovered in this court on the 30th day of January, 1858, a judgment against Bufus Sanger (the defendant above named) for $3,389.19, on which an execution was issued, and returned unsatisfied.

Read the full summary

Appeal from an order setting aside a judgment. • Andrew S. Stone and others recovered in this court on the 30th day of January, 1858, a judgment against Bufus Sanger (the defendant above named) for $3,389.19, on which an execution was issued, and returned unsatisfied. Subsequently, and on May 25, 1859, judgment in the above-entitled action for $1,572.06, was entered upon a confession in the following form: “ A promissory note (for a specified date and amount), which note was given to Loesehigh, Wesendoncb & Co., for goods, wares, and merchandise theretofore purchased of Loesehigh, Wesendonck…

1Opinion of the CourtIngraham, J.

This motion is made by a judgment-creditor of the defendant to set aside the judgment in this case for a defect in the statement of indebtedness. The judgment was entered on a confession. The statement of the indebtedness was as follows: “ a promissory note (for a specified date and amount), which note was given to L., W. & Co., for goods, wares, and merchandise theretofore purchased of L., W. & Co. by the defendant, which note was indorsed by the debtor, and came into the hands of the plaintiffs for a valuable consideration.”

*342The objection to this statement is, that it does not state the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Dunham v. . WatermanNew York Court of Appeals · 1858
  2. Gandal v. FinnNew York Supreme Court · 1856
  3. Freligh v. BrinkNew York Supreme Court · 1858
  4. Post & Baldwin v. ColemanNew York Supreme Court · 1853
  5. Beekman v. KirkNew York Supreme Court · 1857

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

Powered by the Exa API