Case ID: johns_12/html/0204-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam.\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Lovet and Abel against Green.
    On the return of 9, C&YltlOYdiCt it is too late to affidavit,“‘on16 ríówedf was time6 required by the statute.
    The irregularity should be taken advantage of, by motion to quash the certiorari*
    
    Whére a person becomes security for a defendant, in a jushce]s court, in order to obtain a stay of execution against the defendant for thirty days, -and, the justice, with the assent of the security, enters up judgment against him jointly with the defendant, such judgment is valid j the act not declaring the manner in which the security, ihall be taken. •
    IN-ERROR on certiorari. Green commenced a suit by war- ** rant, againt Abel, one of the defendants below, who was brought before the justice on the 21st March, 1813; and Abel, on seeing the plaintiff’s demand, which was a promissory note, acknowledged the same to be correct, to the amount of 16 dollars, and then paid the money to the other defendant, Lovet, who offered himself as security, (in order to obtain a stay of the execution against Abel,) and alleged that he was a freeholder, and that the justice could not refuse him : upon which the justice told him, that since he had received the money, he would consider him in the judgment with Abel, and if the same was not paid within thirty days; he would issue execution against them both jointly; to which Lovet assented; and the judgment was entered against them jointly. Thirty days after the judgment, the justice issued an execution against them both. The justice further returned, that the affidavit annexed to the certiorari served on him, appeared to have been taken on the 18th of May.
    
   Per Curiam.

We cannot, at this stage of the proceedings, notice the objection, that the affidavit upon which the certiorari was allowed, was made after the time required by the statute. This irregularity should have been taken advantage of, by . an ■application to quash the certiorari. But there is no gfound whatever, upon the merits, to reverse this judgment. It is a judgment by confession in open court. Lovet offered himself as security for Abel, for the purpose of obtaining a stay of execution against Abel for thirty d.ays, according to the statute. (1 N. R. L. 394.) The act does not point out the mode in which this security shall be taken, and the surety here, after a full explanation from the justice, consented to be included in the judgment.

judgment affirmed.