Gould v. Spencer
New York Court of Chancery
This was an application to set aside an attachment, which had been issued against the defendant, for not appearing. The appearance was entered with the register, at Albany, on the 7th of August, 1835; which was within twenty days after the return day of the subpoena. And a notice of the appearance was sent to the complainant’s solicitor, but through some mistake was not received.
Read the full summary
This was an application to set aside an attachment, which had been issued against the defendant, for not appearing. The appearance was entered with the register, at Albany, on the 7th of August, 1835; which was within twenty days after the return day of the subpoena. And a notice of the appearance was sent to the complainant’s solicitor, but through some mistake was not received. On the morning of the 24th of August, one of the solicitors for the defendant informed the complainant’s solicitor that he had sent such notice of appearance to be served on him. But the latter said he had not…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
The attachment in this case was irregularly issued, and must be set aside. The order for the attachment must have been entered at Albany, on the 24th of August, after the opening of the register’s office on that day. And yet, in the morning of that day, the complainant says he saw one of the defendant’s solicitors and informed him that he had issued an attachment against the defendant. The attachment, therefore, must have been issued before the order which authorized the issuing of such a.process was entered. And as no costs were legally due at that time upon the attachment…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Valentine v. RobertsDistrict Court, D. Alaska · 1902
- Kinney v. EmeryNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1883
- People ex rel. La Velle v. TraphagenNew York Supreme Court · 1929
- People ex rel. Lower v. DonovanNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
- State Bank v. SpenceCity of New York Municipal Court · 1902
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.