Pettengill v. Mather
New York Supreme Court
Appeal from an order denying a motion to compel a judgment-creditor to execute a satisfaction-piece. In March, 1861, Samuel M. Pettengill recovered judgment against Robert E. Mather, for $1,536.08. Subsequently the plaintiff obtained an order for leave to issue an execution against the person of the defendant, which was affirmed by the general term. (12 Ante, 436.) Execution was accordingly issued, and the defendant gave bail for the jail limits.
Read the full summary
Appeal from an order denying a motion to compel a judgment-creditor to execute a satisfaction-piece. In March, 1861, Samuel M. Pettengill recovered judgment against Robert E. Mather, for $1,536.08. Subsequently the plaintiff obtained an order for leave to issue an execution against the person of the defendant, which was affirmed by the general term. (12 Ante, 436.) Execution was accordingly issued, and the defendant gave bail for the jail limits. In March, 1862, the plaintiff consented, in writing, that the sheriff should release the defendant from imprisonment. In June, 1863, the defendant’s…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.*—Leonard, J.
The order appealed from should be affirmed; The defendant is entitled to the benefit of the discharge only as a defence to future legal proceedings against him. He was also bound, if entitled to a satisfaction, to prepare it and attend the plaintiff with it, and offer to pay the expense of its execution. The authorities cited, do not bear out the defendant’s proposition. In most of the cases cited, the judgments sought to be satisfied of record, have been paid.
Order affirmed with costs.
Present, Sutherland, P. J., Leonard and Barnard, JX
2Cited by1 opinion
- Krulder v. HillmanNew York Supreme Court · 1907