Day v. Rice

New York Supreme Court

Day v. Rice

19 Wend. 644

CourtNew York Supreme Court

DecidedMarch 15, 1839

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 19 Wend. 644 (Day v. Rice) 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

Day v. Rice, 19 Wend. 644 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1839).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court,

Bronson, J.

The second execution was regularly tested of a time when all the defendants were alive; and the plaintiffs did not seek to reach the property of Woolsey, but of the surviving defendants. There can be no doubt that this proceeding was regular at the common law; and I think the statute only applies to the case of a sole defendant, who dies after judgment, and before execution, or where the plaintiff attempts to take the property of a deceased defendant. See Nichols v. Chapman, 9 Wend. 452, Stymets v. Brooks, 10 Wend. 206.

Motion denied.

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

By the Court,

Bronson, J.

The second execution was regularly tested of a time when all the defendants were alive; and the plaintiffs did not seek to reach the property of Woolsey, but of the surviving defendants. There can be no doubt that this proceeding was regular at the common law; and I think the statute only applies to the case of a sole defendant, who dies after judgment, and before execution, or where the plaintiff attempts to take the property of a deceased defendant. See Nichols v. Chapman, 9 Wend. 452, Stymets v. Brooks, 10 Wend. 206.

Motion denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

19 Wend. 644, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/day-v-rice-nysupct-1839.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack