Foshay v. Riche

New York Supreme Court

Foshay v. Riche

2 Hill & Den. 247

DecidedJanuary 15, 1842

StatusPublished

This text of 2 Hill & Den. 247 (Foshay v. Riche) 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

Foshay v. Riche, 2 Hill & Den. 247 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1842).

Pincite

Opinion

Pee Cueiam.

The replication attempts to put in issue matter of law, rather than of fact. It protests the issuing of the Ji. fa., and then, without meeting the plaintiff’s- allegation that, at the' time of the taking complained of, he held and detained the goods under a fi. fa. in virtue of a previous levy, it simply asserts that he did not lawfully hold and'detain them. In short, the replication neither denies the matters alleged in the plea, nor does it confess and avoid' them. There must be judgment for the plaintiff.

Ordered accordingly.

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

Pee Cueiam.

The replication attempts to put in issue matter of law, rather than of fact. It protests the issuing of the Ji. fa., and then, without meeting the plaintiff’s- allegation that, at the' time of the taking complained of, he held and detained the goods under a fi. fa. in virtue of a previous levy, it simply asserts that he did not lawfully hold and'detain them. In short, the replication neither denies the matters alleged in the plea, nor does it confess and avoid' them. There must be judgment for the plaintiff.

Ordered accordingly.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 Hill & Den. 247, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/foshay-v-riche-nysupct-1842.