Turner v. . Roby
New York Court of Appeals
Turner brought assumpsit against Roby and others in the recorder’s court of the city of Buffalo, and declared for work, labor and materials, goods sold and delivered,
1Opinion of the CourtBronson, J.
Assuming that the replication is bad for duplicity, the plaintiff was still entitled to judgment on the ground that the plea is insufficient. In stating the former recovery against Roby, it is not shown that the justice acquired jurisdiction over the person of the defendant. In pleading the judgments of inferior courts of special and limited jurisdiction—and such are our justices’ courts—it is necessary J;o show that the court not only had jurisdiction of the subject matter in controversy, but that it also acquired jurisdiction over the person of the defendant. The only cases in this state…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Cleveland v. RogersNew York Supreme Court · 1831
- Whitney v. ShufeltCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1845
- Stiles v. StewartNew York Supreme Court · 1834
- Farman v. Board of CommissionersIndiana Superior Court · 1873
3Cited by10 opinions
- Davis v. WakeleeSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Harmon v. Comstock Horse & Cattle Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1890
- Tuttle v. RobinsonNew York Supreme Court · 1895
- Willits v. WalterOregon Supreme Court · 1898
- Hamerschlag v. Cathoscope Electrical Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1897
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.