¶1The defendant having endorsed his appearance on the copias, although bailable process, was regularly in court, and the plaintiff had a right to take a default against him. The endorsement of de bene esse on the declaration did not destroy that right; nor was the plaintiff irregular in suing out a writ of inquiry, and making it returnable after the second week of term. The process prohibited by the statute from being sued out or made returnable after the second week of term, is process against the person or property of a party, not a writ of this kind, which is but a warrant to the sheriff to assess the damages, and is no more *290process within the meaning of the statute, than a rule for assessment of damages by the clerk. The proceedings, therefore, are not irregular; but as the defendant claims to have a defence, he is permitted to plead on payment of costs, the judgment to stand as security, it appearing that if it be set aside the plaintiff will be in danger of losing his debt.
2 Wend. 289
Cook v. Tuttle
Decided May 15, 1829
New York Supreme Court · decided 1829-05-15
Motion to set aside proceedings for irregularity. The copias in this cause was returnable on the first day of the last February term, viz. the sixteenth of the month. It was bailable process, but the defendant endorsed his appearance. On the seventeenth a declaration was filed de bene esse, rule to plead entered, and notice affixed in the clerk’s office.
Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently April 1877
1 state decisions
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1829-05-15
View the full empirical analysis of this case →