Kepler v. Barker
Ohio Supreme Court
Error to the' court of common pleas of Hocking county. Reserved in the district court. This was an action brought in the common pleas of HockIng county, against the defendant, late sheriff of .that county, for an escape. ' , To show that he was not liable for the escape, the defendant offered the following defense : “ For a further answer to' the said petition of the said Mary Ann Kepler, plaintiff, the said Henry Barker, defendant, saith, that for several years past, and…
Read the full summary
Error to the' court of common pleas of Hocking county. Reserved in the district court. This was an action brought in the common pleas of HockIng county, against the defendant, late sheriff of .that county, for an escape. ' , To show that he was not liable for the escape, the defendant offered the following defense : “ For a further answer to' the said petition of the said Mary Ann Kepler, plaintiff, the said Henry Barker, defendant, saith, that for several years past, and during all the time from the arrest of the said Amos Donalson, until and after the time of his said escape, as alleged and…
1Opinion of the CourtGholsoN, J.
It is conceded by the counsel for the defend* ant, that the English and American authorities show that the insufficiency of the jail will not excuse the sheriff for the escape of an imprisoned debtor; the excuses for such an escape being, on principles of public policy, limited to cases of necessity, “ such, for instance, as the case of a prisoner who leaves the jail when in danger of a sudden fire within the jail, or when the jail is broken by a public enemy.” Margill v. Taylor, 10 Mass. 206.
But it is insisted, that owing to legislation in Ohio, and The course of decisions under that…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Cargill v. TaylorMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1813
- Richardson v. SpencerOhio Supreme Court · 1833
3Cited by1 opinion
- Scot Lad Foods, Inc. v. Secretary of StateOhio Supreme Court · 1981