Case ID: cow_1/html/0141-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Curia.\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

M’Conkey against Glen.
    Sacia, moved to set aside a writ of capias ad respondendum, because it was returnable the first day of the pres- ’ _ J J . . entterm, at the Capitol in the city of Albany. He insisted that the writ was void, and could not be amended. 
    
    • a cap. ad. retm-nahie at a wrong placéis amendable.
    
      D. Cady, contra, moved to amend.
    
      
      
        Sell.Pr. 82. 5 East, 291. Caines’ Pr. 5 \ R L 318 19, i 2,3. * 9 John. 386. 4 id. 309. 2 id. 190. Cas‘85"
    
   Curia.

The process is voidable—not void, and may be amended. This is like the case of process returnable befor us, which is amendable, though the statute is equally strict in that respect as this, in requiring a specifick form.

Motion to amend granted. 
      
       Vid. Morrell v. Waggoner, 5 John. Rep. 433.