Case Name: Henry Harding vs. Abraham A. Downs
Court: Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Jurisdiction: Massachusetts
Decision Date: 1872-09
Citations: 110 Mass. 56
Docket Number: 
Parties: Henry Harding vs. Abraham A. Downs.
Judges: 
Reporter: Massachusetts Reports
Volume: 110
Pages: 56–57

Head Matter:
Henry Harding vs. Abraham A. Downs.
Under the Gen. Sts. c. 120, § 12, a defendant is entitled to costs upon failure of the plaintiff to enter the writ, although the writ contained no declaration and the defendant waa arrested thereon.
A. motion setting forth that the party moving was arrested in an action of contract, and that the plaintiff therein failed to enter the writ, filed in a police court with the copy of the writ on which the arrest was made, is sufficient to give the court jurisdiction to enter a judgment for costs under the Gen. Sts. c. 120, § 12; c. 116, §§ 10, 11.
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court, affirming a judgment of the Police Court of Lee, allowing costa to the defendant, who had been arrested on a writ which the plaintiff failed to enter. The motion on which this judgment was made was as follows : “ May 1, 1871. And now the defendant comes into court and says that he has been arrested in an action of contract by the said plaintiff and commanded and summoned to appear in this court, on this first day of May instant. Whereúpon this said defendant prays for his costs in this behalf by him sustained.” The writ on which the defendant was arrested, and a copy of which was filed in court, contained no declaration.
J. Dewey, Jr., for the defendant.
T. P. Pingree, for the plaintiff.
There was no legal service, the. writ could not have been properly entered, and the defendant was nor obliged to appear. Gen. Sts. c. 129, § 7. The defendant should have set forth in his motion all the facts that entitled him to costs.

Opinion:
Colt, J.
The plaintiff appeals from the judgment of the Superior Court affirming the judgment of the Police Court of Lee, by which costs were accorded to the defendant on the plaintiff's failure to enter the writ in this case in that court. It is not open to the plaintiff to object to this allowance that the writ waa defective in not containing a declaration. It was sufficient to require the defendant's appearance at court, even if it might after appearance have been dismissed on his motion.
The motion for costs filed in the Police Court, with the copy of the writ upon which the defendant was arrested, was sufficient in form to give the court jurisdiction to enter judgment for creta on a failure to enter the writ. Ho particular formality is required; it is enough if the fact of the service of the writ is alleged and the writ sufficiently described. Gen. Sts. e. 120, § 12; c. 116, § 10,11. Judgment affirmed.