Case Name: James B. Swain agt. Lawrence Heartt
Court: New York Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1846-02
Citations: 2 How. Pr. 90
Docket Number: 
Parties: James B. Swain agt. Lawrence Heartt.
Judges: 
Reporter: Howard's Practice Reports
Volume: 2
Pages: 90–90

Head Matter:
James B. Swain agt. Lawrence Heartt.
Papers, on which a motion is founded for a writ of error coram nobis, should not be entitled. (I Soward’s Pr. Rep. 115.)
Where infancy is clearly shown for error in fact, it is of course to allow the writ, unless something is shown in answer, which is a bar to it. The assertion .of the defendant in reference to another subject matter, that he was of full age, is not an answer to the motion.
February Term, 1846.
Motion by defendant, at last December special term, for a writ of error coram nobis.
It appeared from defendant’s papers, which were not entitled, that a verdict and judgment for $300 had been recovered in this court against defendant Heartt, in an action of assault and battery; and that Heartt was, at the time of the joining issue in the cause, an infant under the age of twenty-one years.
On the part of the plaintiff it appeared that it was an aggravated assault and battery, and that the defendant, the fall previous thereto, had asserted that he was “ old enough to vote at the general election,” and that he had appeared to the action by attorney, and entered special bail, &c. Plaintiff’s counsel objected, 1st. That the affidavits for the motion not being entitled could not be regarded: and 2d, that the allowance of the writ was discretionary, and, under the circiimstances, should be refused.
Defendant’s counsel, in answer to the first objection, cited 1 Howard's Practice Pep. 175, and to the second, Tidd's Practice, 1196.
A. Taber, defendants counsel.
S. F. Reynolds, defendants attorney.
J. McKown, plaintiff's counsel.
Ward & Lockwood, plaintiff's attorneys.

Opinion:
Jewett, Justice.
Granted the motion.