Brayton v. Smith
New York Court of Chancery
A writ of ne exeat was issued in this case against H. M. F. Smith, one of the defendants, in which the sheriff was directed to hold him to bail in the sum of $1,000 ; upon which writ the sheriff returned that he had executed the same by taking bail from the defendant as therein commanded, and that such bail were J. M. Bull and J. Simpson.
Read the full summary
A writ of ne exeat was issued in this case against H. M. F. Smith, one of the defendants, in which the sheriff was directed to hold him to bail in the sum of $1,000 ; upon which writ the sheriff returned that he had executed the same by taking bail from the defendant as therein commanded, and that such bail were J. M. Bull and J. Simpson. A final decree having been rendered against the defendant Smith for the payment of $831,19 and interest from December 30th, 1836, and an execution against the body of the defendant. for the collection thereof having been returned non est, the complainant’s…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
It appears to be settled that the sheriff must at his peril take sufficient security upon a writ of ne exeat for his own indemnity if the defendant leaves *491the state so that he cannot be made amenable to the process of the court pending the suit or compelled to perform the final decree. (Boehm v. Wood, Turn. & Russ. Rep. 332.) If the defendant, therefore, cannot obtain such security as will satisfy the sheriff, or if he wishes to leave the state upon business or otherwise pending the suit, his proper course is to apply to the court to discharge the ne exeat upon his giving…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Griswold v. HazardSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Beckwith v. SmithNew York Supreme Court · 1870
- Griswold v. HazardSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Marselis v. People ex rel. of ButterColorado Court of Appeals · 1903
- Marselis v. People ex rel. of ButterColorado Court of Appeals · 1903