Caldcleugh v. Carey
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
ERROR to the District Court for the city and county of Philadelphia. This was an action of debt on an insolvent bond, by Robert A. Caldcleugh against Henry C. Carey and J. M. Sanderson, impleaded with Burd Patterson, who was not served with process.
Read the full summary
ERROR to the District Court for the city and county of Philadelphia. This was an action of debt on an insolvent bond, by Robert A. Caldcleugh against Henry C. Carey and J. M. Sanderson, impleaded with Burd Patterson, who was not served with process. The bond was dated the 2d of October 1841, and was conditioned for the appearance of Burd Patterson at the next term of the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia county, to present his petition and take the benefit of the insolvent laws in the form prescribed by the Act of Assembly. The declaration set out for breaches that the defendant did not…
1Per curiam
The principle of this case was settled in M’Clure v. Foreman, (4 Watts éf Serg. 280), where it was held that one discharge serves for all. In the case at bar, the arrest in the county of the debtor’s residence was prior, in point of time, and the discharge from it preferable, in point of effect, to a discharge from an arrest abroad. A second discharge, therefore, would have been nugatory.
Judgment affirmed.
2Cited by1 opinion
- Smith v. VasbinderSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1875