Ex parte Thayer
New York Supreme Court
Thayer made an affidavit that he was and is an insol vent debtor, and that he presented a petition, (made out as required by the act of the 7th of April, 1819, with the other papers required by that act) to the First Judge of Yates county, where the deponent resided, but the Judge refused to receive the papers, on the ground that it appeared by the deponent’s inventory that he owed but one debt, which was due upon a judgment in the C. P. of Ontario county, recovered against…
Read the full summary
Thayer made an affidavit that he was and is an insol vent debtor, and that he presented a petition, (made out as required by the act of the 7th of April, 1819, with the other papers required by that act) to the First Judge of Yates county, where the deponent resided, but the Judge refused to receive the papers, on the ground that it appeared by the deponent’s inventory that he owed but one debt, which was due upon a judgment in the C. P. of Ontario county, recovered against the deponent for an assault and battery. Upon this affidavit,
1Opinion of the Court
The Court were clear that the words debt or debts, used in the act, extended to demands due on judgment, whether upon tort or contract; and they said it had so been holden before.(a)
Motion granted.
See The People v. The Marine Court of New York, (3 Cowen’s Rep. 366,) where the same construction was given to the act for the relief of debtors, with respect to the imprisonment of their persons. (1 R. L. 348.)
2Cited by3 opinions
- Creble v. YouzwiakNew York Supreme Court · 1930
- Gardner v. LayNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1867
- Grocers' National Bank v. ClarkNew York Supreme Court · 1866