Georgia Lumber Co. v. Bissell
New York Court of Chancery
This was an application to discharge E. Bissell, one of the defendants, from his arrest upon a ne exeat, on the ground that no subpoena was served at the time he was arrested upon the writ of ne exeat.
Read the full summary
This was an application to discharge E. Bissell, one of the defendants, from his arrest upon a ne exeat, on the ground that no subpoena was served at the time he was arrested upon the writ of ne exeat. On the part of the complainants an affidavit was produced, showing that upon the taking out of the ne exeat, the same, together with a subpoena and injunction, were delivered to the sheriff of New-York, where the defendant Bissell then was; but that Bissell left the city for the west the same day and before either could be served; that a new writ of ne exeat was immediately issued and sent to…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
As the complainants took out a subpoena with the first ne exeat and made a bona fide attempt to serve the same, and sent a new subpoena to Erie *226county to be served, immediately upon learning of the arrest of Bissell on the ne exeat at that place, there was no irregularity which entitles Bissell to have the writ of ne exeat set aside. The defendant, upon being arrested on that writ was apprised of the institution of the suit against him, and might at once have entered a voluntary appearance and demanded a copy of the bill. He cannot therefore complain that he has been prejudiced…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Havemeyer v. Brooklyn Sugar Refining Co.New York Supreme Court · 1890
- Conkling Rug Co. v. HinmanNew York Supreme Court · 1941
- Kaliske v. WeilNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1895