Miller v. Johnson

New York Supreme Court

Miller v. Johnson

12 Wend. 197

New York Supreme Court·Decided June 19, 1834·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

[198]*198 By the Court,

Sutherland, J.

The notice is not in the form prescribed by the statute, 1 R. S. 746, § 12, 13, 14, but the plaintiff cannot avail himself of the defect. Had the sheriff disregarded it, it might be questionable whether he would have been liable to the landlord. The statute is merely directory, and does not say that notice in the form prescribed shall be in the nature of a condition precedent.

Motion denied.

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

[198]*198 By the Court,

Sutherland, J.

The notice is not in the form prescribed by the statute, 1 R. S. 746, § 12, 13, 14, but the plaintiff cannot avail himself of the defect. Had the sheriff disregarded it, it might be questionable whether he would have been liable to the landlord. The statute is merely directory, and does not say that notice in the form prescribed shall be in the nature of a condition precedent.

Motion denied.

Miller v. Johnson, 12 Wend. 197 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1834).

Pincite

12 Wend. 197 (Miller v. Johnson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related