Legal Opinion

Norton v. Barnum

New York Supreme Court

Decided January 15, 1823PublishedCited by 5 opinions

MOTION, in behalf of the defendant, that the order of W. Howell, first Judge of Ontario county, directing the defendant to be held to bail, be vacated j and that the Sheriff ' of Ontario be directed to deliver up the bail-bond, fee. This was an action for a libel; and the affidavit, on which the Judge made the order, set forth the libel, and stated, that seeurity for any damages to be recovered by the plaintiff, required that the defendant should be held to bail.

Read the full summary

MOTION, in behalf of the defendant, that the order of W. Howell, first Judge of Ontario county, directing the defendant to be held to bail, be vacated j and that the Sheriff ' of Ontario be directed to deliver up the bail-bond, fee. This was an action for a libel; and the affidavit, on which the Judge made the order, set forth the libel, and stated, that seeurity for any damages to be recovered by the plaintiff, required that the defendant should be held to bail. The plaintiff now offered a supplementary affidavit, that the defendant was a young man, without family, having no visible…

1Per curiam

The cases of Clason v. Gould, (2 Caines’ Rep. 47.) and Van Vechten v. Hopkins, (2 Johns. Rep. 293.) fully decide, that the affidavit on which the Judge granted the order to hold to bail, is entirely defective. It follows, that the defendant has been improperly held to baib The affidavit now offered by the plaintiff cannot be received. According to the practice of the Court of K. B., in England, a supplemental affidavit, for the purpose of curing a defect in the original affidavit, is not admissible. (Molling *338v. Buckholtz, 2 Maule & Selwyn, 563.) If a default has been entered on an imperfect…

2Cited by5 opinions

  1. Martin v. WalkerDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1850
  2. Blakelee v. BuchananNew York Supreme Court · 1872
  3. Benson v. BennettSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1855
  4. Scott v. Crum, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Dauphin County1860
  5. Withers v. ThorntonU.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia · 1827

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API