12 Johns. 353
Decided October 15, 1815
New York Supreme Court · decided 1815-10-15
THIS was an action of debt, on a single bill. The defendant pleaded, 1. JR on est fccctum; 2. Payment at the day ; 3. Payment after the day. The conclusion of these pleas was to the country, and the defendant added the similiter to each, and - / .. . . ’ these issues the jury round a verdict for the plaintiff. ,. » The defendant moved in arrest of judgment, on the ground that the two last pleas, of solvit ad diem, and solvit post diem, required replications.
Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently October 1829
1 state decisions
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1815-10-15
View the full empirical analysis of this case →
¶1The defendant, in his special plea, tendered an issue to the country, instead of concluding with a verificatian, as he ought to have done; and he added the similiter himself. This was a mispleading which is cured by the verdict, The defendant cannot take advantage of his own mispleading, to defeat the plaintiff’s suit, when the jury have found a verdict for the plaintiff. (Harvey v. Richards, 1 Hen. Bl. Rep. 644.)
¶2Motion denied»