Linsley v. Keys & Williams

New York Supreme Court

Linsley v. Keys & Williams

5 Johns. 123

CourtNew York Supreme Court

DecidedNovember 15, 1809

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 5 Johns. 123 (Linsley v. Keys & Williams) 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

Linsley v. Keys & Williams, 5 Johns. 123 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1809).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The warrant under which the defendant / . offered to justify, was sufficiently set forth m the last branch of the notice, to entitle the defendants to offer it in evidence. It was not requisite to have stated in the notice, the cause of action, for which the warrant was issued. In Belli v. Broadbent andwz/e, (3 Term Rep. 183.) the cause of action was not set forth, in a special plea of justification, under mesne process, and yet the plea was held good. The verdict must, therefore,, beset aside, and a new trial granted, with costs to abide the event.

Rule granted.

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

Per Curiam.

The warrant under which the defendant / . offered to justify, was sufficiently set forth m the last branch of the notice, to entitle the defendants to offer it in evidence. It was not requisite to have stated in the notice, the cause of action, for which the warrant was issued. In Belli v. Broadbent andwz/e, (3 Term Rep. 183.) the cause of action was not set forth, in a special plea of justification, under mesne process, and yet the plea was held good. The verdict must, therefore,, beset aside, and a new trial granted, with costs to abide the event.

Rule granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 Johns. 123, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/linsley-v-keys-williams-nysupct-1809.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack