New York Supreme Court, 1812

Cramer v. Van Alstyne

New York Supreme Court · Decided October 15, 1812

9 Johns. 386

Counsel

Van Wyck, contra, contended, that the writ was void, and could, not be amended. He cited 2 Johns. Rep. 190. 4 Johns. Rep. 309. 2 Caines’ Rep. 63. 2 Salk. 7 00.

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

The case of Campbell v. Gumming (2 Burr. 1187.) is in point. Where an exec.ulion is returnable out of term, it is not void, though liable to be set aside, on motion, for irregularity. It may, therefore, be amended, though it would be otherwise as to mesne process. We grant the rule to amend, on payment of costs.

Motion granted.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.