Segourney v. Ingraham

21 F. Cas. 1024, 2 Wash. C. C. 336
CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Pennsylvania
DecidedOctober 15, 1808
StatusPublished

This text of 21 F. Cas. 1024 (Segourney v. Ingraham) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Segourney v. Ingraham, 21 F. Cas. 1024, 2 Wash. C. C. 336 (circtdpa 1808).

Opinion

BY THE COURT.

The writ is returned, and of course the plaintiff has obtained the effect of his motion. If the marshal has misconducted' himself in not having served the writ, or has made a false return, the plaintiff can take his remedy. But on the present rule, we have nothing further to do.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
21 F. Cas. 1024, 2 Wash. C. C. 336, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/segourney-v-ingraham-circtdpa-1808.