Case Name: Birdsall and Birdsall vs. Pixley
Court: New York Supreme Court of Judicature
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1830-05
Citations: 4 Wend. 196
Docket Number: 
Parties: Birdsall and Birdsall vs. Pixley.
Judges: 
Reporter: Wendell's Reports
Volume: 4
Pages: 196–196

Head Matter:
Birdsall and Birdsall vs. Pixley.
An attachment will not be allowed against a defendant who neglects to deposit a paper, in pursuance of a rule of court, granted on the application of a plaintiff, to obtain a discovery.
Motion for an attachment. At the last term, a rule was granted requiring the defendant to deposit in the clerk’s office of the county of Chenango a certain indenture of lease alleged to be in his possession, to enable the plaintiffs to declare thereon, or to shew cause by the first day of this term why an attachment should not issue. Notice having been duly served, the attachment was now asked for.
A. G. Ransom, for the motion.

Opinion:
By the Court,
Marcy, J.
The rule of last term, allowing an attachment in the alternative, was improvidently ordered. The power of the court to compel discoveries in cases of this kind is limited to nonsuiting a plaintiff, or striking out a plea or notice of special matter of a defendant, or debarring him from any defence in relation to which a discovery is sought; and by an express provision, their power is confined to the remedies mentioned. The motion for the attachment is therefore denied. 2 R. S. 200, § 26.)