Stacy v. Farnham

2 How. Pr. 26
New York Supreme Court·Decided December 15, 1845·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Jewett, Justice.

This suit is neither brought by or against the sheriff of Brie, (2 R. S. 533, *§ 67,) therefore the writ of replevin was properly ^directed to and executed by him. The affidavit of ownership of property, &c., annexed to the writ should not have been entitled; for the reason it is informal and defective, but it maybe amended. (Cutler agt. Bathbone, sheriff, 1 Hill, 204, and cases there cited.) The plaintiff may, therefore, amend the defect in the affidavit by making and filing a new affidavit annexed to the writ without costs. {Rule 61.)

Buie accordingly.

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

Stacy v. Farnham, 2 How. Pr. 26 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1845).

2 How. Pr. 26 (Stacy v. Farnham) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Bardwell v. Stubbert
17 Neb. 485 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1885)