Craig v. Murdock

Decided March 19, 1835

New York Supreme Court · decided 1835-03-19

A motion was made in this caseto set aside the declaration, on the ground that it was entitled as of January term, 1835, in a suit commenced by capias, returnable in July term, 1834.

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently September 1846

2 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1835-03-19

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1By the Court,

Sutherland, J.

¶2A declaration in a suit commenced by capias must be entitled of the term in which the writ is returnable. In the present case not only does the regular course of proceedings require a compliance with this rule of practice, but the substantial rights of the defendant demand it. By entitling this declaration as of a term subsequent to that in which the writ was returnable, the plaintiff would be at liberty, unless the irregularity was corrected, to give evidence on the trial, of causes of action accruing subsequent to the issuing of the capias; which ought not to be permitted. The motion must be granted, but the plaintiff has leave to amend.