Kesler v. Haynes

6 Wend. 547
New York Supreme Court·Decided August 4, 1831·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

By the Court

Savage, Ch. J.

It was the duty of the clerk to have entered the appearance of the defendants on the writ being returned. 2 R. S. 528, § 34. The defendants cannot avail themselves of his omission ; nor can they object that the sheriff accepted a bond with but one surety. The statute, 2 R. S. 523, § 7, requires a bond with sufficient sureties to be approved by the sheriff, to be executed before the service of a writ of replevin. If he omits to" take" sufficient surety, he is responsible, but the proceedings are not irregular.

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

Kesler v. Haynes, 6 Wend. 547 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1831).

6 Wend. 547 (Kesler v. Haynes) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Morris v. Hanson
2 Colo. App. 154 (Colorado Court of Appeals, 1892)
Morton v. Campbell
14 Abb. Pr. 410 (New York Supreme Court, 1862)
Morton & Canda v. Campbell
37 Barb. 179 (New York Supreme Court, 1862)
Wilson v. Williams
18 Wend. 305 (New York Supreme Court, 1836)