Kurtz v. Jones

Decided October 15, 1823

Mr. Key was allowed by the Court to appear for the defendant, and moved to quash the attachment, because it did not appear in the warrant of the magistrate ordering the attachment, nor any where else in the affidavit or proceedings that the plaintiff was a citizen of the District of Columbia, or of the United States, or of 'any State of the United States. contended that it was not necessary that it should appear in any of the preliminary proceedings, but that it wras…

Decided 1823-10-15

The CouRT

¶1([nem. con.) permitted evidence now to be given that the plaintiff was a citizen of the District of Columbia ; and said that the point was decided by this Court in 1806, and as that decision has been acquiesced in and practised upon ever since; and as there is a superior tribunal who can correct the error, if it be one, this Court will not now overrule its former decision.

¶2Judgment of condemnation.

¶3A bill of exceptions was taken by the defendant’s counsel; but no writ of error was prosecuted.

¶4The debt was $769.88.