Danielson v. Andrews

Decided October 15, 1822

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · decided 1822-10-15

<p>The ad damnum in the writ was increased in the court below, so as to give a right of appeal.2</p> <p>2 The ad damnum in the writ being laid at $ 100 and the judgment being rendered erroneously for a greater sum, this does not give the defendant a right to appeal. Hemmenway v. Hickes, 4 Pick. 497. An appeal lies from the Common Pleas in personal actions, where the ad damnum exceeds, $ 100 although the . demand set out is less than that sum. Chamberlain v. Cochran, 8 Pick. 522.</p>

Relies on Jackson ex dem. Gansevoort v. Murray

Decided 1822-10-15

Wilde J.,

¶1in delivering the opinion of the Court, said, that this seemed to be within the discretion of the judge of the Court of Common Pleas, and that this Court did not think proper to overrule the amendment.3 It struck him, that it would dissolve the attachment, where there is a subsequent attachment.4

¶2See McLellan v. Crofton, 6 Greenl. 307, 328; Bogart v. McDonald, 2 Johns. Cas. 219.

¶3 See Putnam v. Hall, 3 Pick. 445.