Hunt v. Brooks
New York Supreme Court
THE plaintiff recovered a judgment against the defendant, in August, 1804, on which a test. ji. fa. was issued, and returned in part satisfied. A test. cap. ad sat. was thereupon issued, on which the defendant was imprisoned from 1805 to June, 1808, when, on application to the Court of Common Pleas, he was. discharged from imprisonment, pursuant to “ the act for the relief of debtors with respect to the imprisonment of their persons.” (1 JY.
Read the full summary
THE plaintiff recovered a judgment against the defendant, in August, 1804, on which a test. ji. fa. was issued, and returned in part satisfied. A test. cap. ad sat. was thereupon issued, on which the defendant was imprisoned from 1805 to June, 1808, when, on application to the Court of Common Pleas, he was. discharged from imprisonment, pursuant to “ the act for the relief of debtors with respect to the imprisonment of their persons.” (1 JY. R. L. 348. sess. 36. ch, 81.) And on the 7th of February, 1812, the defendant was discharged from his debts, by virtue of the “ act for the benefit of…
1Per curiam
The Court, in October term, when they allowed the defendant his audita querela, decided that it should not operate as a supersedeas to the execution. We did not mean to set aside or stay the execution. This is a re*7newal of the same application, nied. The motion must be eta
Motion denied.
2Cited by3 opinions
- Union Canal Co. v. YoungSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1836
- Alcott v. AveryNew York Court of Chancery · 1846
- Wardell v. EdenNew York Supreme Court · 1801