Flagg v. Jones
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract. The writ, which was returnable at a term of the Superior Court to be holden at Lawrence on the first Monday of March, 1869, was served by the arrest of the defendant. The bail bond executed by the defendant recited that the writ was returnable at the Superior Court to be holden at Salem, and was to be void if the defendant should “ appear before the said justices of said court as aforesaid.” Lawrence, not Salem, was the place where the term was to be held.
Read the full summary
Contract. The writ, which was returnable at a term of the Superior Court to be holden at Lawrence on the first Monday of March, 1869, was served by the arrest of the defendant. The bail bond executed by the defendant recited that the writ was returnable at the Superior Court to be holden at Salem, and was to be void if the defendant should “ appear before the said justices of said court as aforesaid.” Lawrence, not Salem, was the place where the term was to be held. The defendant seasonably filed a motion to dismiss, because the defendant was improperly held to bail, and because an invalid…
1Opinion of the CourtGray, C. J.
The writ was in due form, returnable at the Superior Court to be holden at Lawrence on the first Monday of March, 1869. No attachment of goods or estate was made, and the arrest of the defendant was the only service of the writ upon him which was required by law. Gen. Sts. c. 123, §§ 10, 11, 23. The bail bond is indeed, by our statutes, to be considered so far a matter of record that it can be enforced by scire facias only, but it is no part of the record for any other purpose. Gen. Sts. c. 125, § 8. Bean v. Parker, 17 Mass. 591. Crane v. Keating, 13 Pick. 339. It is at least doubtful whether…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Bean v. ParkerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1822
- Colburn v. DownesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1813
- Arnold v. AllenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1811
- Jones v. BunnCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1859