Beekman v. Satterlee
New York Supreme Court
Assumpsit against the defendant as endorser of a promissory note to the plaintiffs; tried at the Albany circuit, October 11th, 1823, before Duer, C. Judge. The note was for $500, dated August 29th, 1815, and payable 6 months after date. The declaration also contained the money counts. The plea was non accrevit infra sex annos.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit against the defendant as endorser of a promissory note to the plaintiffs; tried at the Albany circuit, October 11th, 1823, before Duer, C. Judge. The note was for $500, dated August 29th, 1815, and payable 6 months after date. The declaration also contained the money counts. The plea was non accrevit infra sex annos. Replication, that within six years after the plaintiffs’ causes of action accrued, viz. on the 18th of August, 1821, at, &c. the plaintiffs sued and prosecuted out of this court a certain writ, called a capias ad respondendum, directed to the sheriff of the city and…
1Opinion of the Court
Curia, per Woodworth, J.
The rejoinder puts in issue two facts ; 1. It denies that the writ was delivered to the sneriff to be executed; 2. That it was sued out with intent to implead the defendant upon the supposed causes of action.
As to the first, the evidence is express, that the writ was not delivered to be executed, that is, to be actually served on the defendant. As to the second, although not intended to be served, it was, nevertheless, issued with intent to implead the defendant in the action. It was to save the statute of limitations, on the ground that process had been sued out…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Garland v. ChattleNew York Supreme Court · 1815
- Lion ex dem. Eden & Wood v. BurtisNew York Supreme Court · 1821
3Cited by1 opinion
- Blair v. CaryWisconsin Supreme Court · 1859