Adams v. Freeman
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action of trespass and false imprisonment. The defendant pleaded, 1. Not guilty. 2. That on the 11th May, 1809, the parties submitted all differences to arbitrators, (see ante, 1 p6 li50) so that the award should be made on or before the 1st July, 1809. The time was enlarged to the 1st August, and, before that time, an award was made, to wit, on the 15th July.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of trespass and false imprisonment. The defendant pleaded, 1. Not guilty. 2. That on the 11th May, 1809, the parties submitted all differences to arbitrators, (see ante, 1 p6 li50) so that the award should be made on or before the 1st July, 1809. The time was enlarged to the 1st August, and, before that time, an award was made, to wit, on the 15th July. The bonds contained an agreement, that the submission should be x f nrxji -rv i made a rule of court, pursuant to the act ot 28th February, 1791, of the court of common pleas of Washington county. The plaintiff having made…
1Per curiam
The plaintiff was attached and imprisoned under the statute, (Lams, vol. 1. 156.) for refusing or neglecting to perform the award; and the statute makes the party, in such case, subject to all the penalties of contemning a rule of court.” The irregularity contended for on the part of the plaintiff is, that he was arrested on the attachment, on the 31st of May, being after the return day. The attachment was returnable on the 29th of May,"and on that day, the defendant avers that he delivered the process to the sheriff. It was lawful for the sheriff to have arrested the plaintiff on the return…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Dempsey v. ChambersMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1891
- Laing v. MittenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1904
- Magnuson v. O'DeaWashington Supreme Court · 1913
- Anderson v. SchmidtAppellate Court of Illinois · 1901
- Mussey v. CahoonSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1852
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.