Cutler v. Boyd
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract on a recognizance entered into on February 23, 1876, under the Gen. Sts. e. 124, § 10, by John F. Boyd as principal, and the defendant as surety, and conditioned that John F. Boyd, who had been arrested in the county of Middlesex, on an execution in favor of the plaintiffs, should, within thirty days from the day of his arrest, deliver himself up for examination before some magistrate authorized to act, giving notice of the time and place thereof in the manner…
Read the full summary
Contract on a recognizance entered into on February 23, 1876, under the Gen. Sts. e. 124, § 10, by John F. Boyd as principal, and the defendant as surety, and conditioned that John F. Boyd, who had been arrested in the county of Middlesex, on an execution in favor of the plaintiffs, should, within thirty days from the day of his arrest, deliver himself up for examination before some magistrate authorized to act, giving notice of the time and place thereof in the manner provided by law, and appear at the time fixed for his examination, and from time to time until the same was concluded, and…
1Opinion of the CourtSoule, J.
It is essential to the validity of a discharge granted on an application to take the poor debtor’s oath, that a proper notice be duly served on the proper person.
By the Gen. Sts. c. 124, § 13, it is provided that when, as in the case at bar, the creditor does not reside in the county where the arrest is made, and no agent nor attorney for him is found therein, the notice may be served on the officer who made the irrest, and that the service shall be made by any officer qualified to serve civil process. If the service is made on the wrong person, even though that person be the creditor, as may…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Francis v. HowardMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1874
- Homer v. SinnottMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1875
3Cited by1 opinion
- Campbell v. EastmanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1898