Sullivan v. Alexander
18 Johns. 3
Opinion
The motion must be denied. The Court have, not only in Sloan v. Wattles, but in several other cases, allowed the attorney, or a person specially authorized [5] by him for that purpose, to alter the teste and return of a writ before it was served.
Motion denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Sullivan v. Alexander, 18 Johns. 3 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1820).
18 Johns. 3 (Sullivan v. Alexander) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
McCracken v. Richardson
46 N.J.L. 50 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1884)
Bray v. Libby
71 Me. 276 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1880)
Osgood v. Norris
21 N.H. 435 (Superior Court of New Hampshire, 1850)
Plumer v. Fogg
18 N.H. 559 (Superior Court of New Hampshire, 1847)
Dearborn v. Twist
6 N.H. 44 (Superior Court of New Hampshire, 1832)