Rathbone v. Rathbone

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Rathbone v. Rathbone

22 Mass. 221

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedSeptember 15, 1827

StatusPublished

This text of 22 Mass. 221 (Rathbone v. Rathbone) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Rathbone v. Rathbone, 22 Mass. 221 (Mass. 1827).

Pincite

Opinion

The opinion of the Court was drawn up by

Parker C. J.

We consider the plea in abatement good, notwithstanding the causes assigned in support of the special demurrer. It is immaterial what the writ contained when it was first filled, provided it did not contain any cause of action when put into the hands of the officer to be served, and when actually served ; for the question must always be, whether then when it was served it was a good writ so as [223]*223$o hold tí e property attached. The allegation of there being no cause of action when it was put into the officer’s hands for service, is surplusage and may be rejected ; so that there is no duplicity. The want of an allegation of the time when it was put into the hands of the officer was immaterial. And as to the time of the service, it may be supplied by recurring to the return itself; as in the case of Slayton v. Inhabitants of Chester, 4 Mass. R. 478.

The other causes of demurrer were not insisted on, nor could they be with any reason, as they are involved in the two first.

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

The opinion of the Court was drawn up by

Parker C. J.

We consider the plea in abatement good, notwithstanding the causes assigned in support of the special demurrer. It is immaterial what the writ contained when it was first filled, provided it did not contain any cause of action when put into the hands of the officer to be served, and when actually served ; for the question must always be, whether then when it was served it was a good writ so as [223]*223$o hold tí e property attached. The allegation of there being no cause of action when it was put into the officer’s hands for service, is surplusage and may be rejected ; so that there is no duplicity. The want of an allegation of the time when it was put into the hands of the officer was immaterial. And as to the time of the service, it may be supplied by recurring to the return itself; as in the case of Slayton v. Inhabitants of Chester, 4 Mass. R. 478.

The other causes of demurrer were not insisted on, nor could they be with any reason, as they are involved in the two first.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

22 Mass. 221, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rathbone-v-rathbone-mass-1827.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack