Bowne v. Mellor

New York Supreme Court

Bowne v. Mellor

6 Hill & Den. 496

DecidedMay 15, 1844

StatusPublished

This text of 6 Hill & Den. 496 (Bowne v. Mellor) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bowne v. Mellor, 6 Hill & Den. 496 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1844).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court, Bronson, J.

As Mellor was not a resident of the county of Delaware, there should have beeiia short, instead of a long attachment. He might have treated" the process as void, and recovered his damages in an action of trespass. But he elected, as I think he had a right to do, to waive the irregularity, and take his remedy on the bond. Having adopted that course, Bowne, who procured the attachment to be issued, was not at liberty to show the irregularity for the" purpose of defeating the action.

Judgment affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

By the Court, Bronson, J.

As Mellor was not a resident of the county of Delaware, there should have beeiia short, instead of a long attachment. He might have treated" the process as void, and recovered his damages in an action of trespass. But he elected, as I think he had a right to do, to waive the irregularity, and take his remedy on the bond. Having adopted that course, Bowne, who procured the attachment to be issued, was not at liberty to show the irregularity for the" purpose of defeating the action.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

6 Hill & Den. 496, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bowne-v-mellor-nysupct-1844.