¶1It was decided in the case of Bunn v. Thomas & King, that where a term or more intervenes between the teste and return of a writ, it is a nullity, and that where a writ is void, it cannot be amended. The motion must be denied.
¶2Rule refused.
4 Johns. 309
Burk v. Barnard
Decided May 15, 1809
New York Supreme Court · decided 1809-05-15
LYNCH, for the plaintiff, moved to amend the capias se? respondendum in this cause, which was sued out on the 15th April last, and returnable at this term, and the defendant arrested thereon. The writ was tested by mistake in the year 1808, instead of the year 1809.* He cited Carty v. A.silly ^ as a case in point. ,
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1809-05-15
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently March 1898
7 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
View the full empirical analysis of this case →