Filkins v. Brockway

19 Johns. 170
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedAugust 15, 1821
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 19 Johns. 170 (Filkins v. Brockway) 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
Filkins v. Brockway, 19 Johns. 170 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1821).

Opinion

Per'¡Curiam.

We deny the motion, without costs; but we think proper to lay down this-general rule, in future : that a seal which has been used by heitig affixed to anypto■cess which has been filled up, whether such process has «been-delivered to the sheriff or not, carinbt be again used, vor «attached to another writ. It "is functus officio, ahfrtt).hilow it tobe again used, would lead to improper practices, and be a fraud on the ‘cletfk?s office. Wé intend to«put a [171]*171Stdp to a practice sd inc'dfrect, in this respect, arid shall set Aside aity writ hr procéss to Which Such A seal shall bé so Affi&ed.

Motion denied.

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

Related

Lessee of Boal v. King
6 Ohio 11 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1833)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
19 Johns. 170, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/filkins-v-brockway-nysupct-1821.