Moody v. Townsend

New York Supreme Court

Moody v. Townsend

3 Abb. Pr. 375

DecidedSeptember 15, 1856

StatusPublished

This text of 3 Abb. Pr. 375 (Moody v. Townsend) 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

Moody v. Townsend, 3 Abb. Pr. 375 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1856).

Pincite

Opinion

Roosevelt, J.

Where a judgment is entered by confession, it is necessary that the sworn statement of indebtedness accompanying it should be sufficiently specific in sums, dates, and considerations to enable the other creditors of the debtor, with reasonable facility, to investigate its genuineness and protect themselves against fraud.

A general allegation that the judgment was “ for goods sold and delivered,” or on a note “ given for goods sold and delivered,” is not a compliance with requirements of the statute.

Order affirmed, without costs.

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

Roosevelt, J.

Where a judgment is entered by confession, it is necessary that the sworn statement of indebtedness accompanying it should be sufficiently specific in sums, dates, and considerations to enable the other creditors of the debtor, with reasonable facility, to investigate its genuineness and protect themselves against fraud.

A general allegation that the judgment was “ for goods sold and delivered,” or on a note “ given for goods sold and delivered,” is not a compliance with requirements of the statute.

Order affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 Abb. Pr. 375, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/moody-v-townsend-nysupct-1856.