Lindsay v. State
Supreme Court of Alabama
Error to the Circuit Court of Coffee. Before the Hon. E. Pickens. This was a proceeding on a forfeited recognizance, at the instance of the State against the plaintiffs in error, as the securities of one Gardner Hardy.
Read the full summary
Error to the Circuit Court of Coffee. Before the Hon. E. Pickens. This was a proceeding on a forfeited recognizance, at the instance of the State against the plaintiffs in error, as the securities of one Gardner Hardy. The recognizance is as follows : “ The State of Alabama, Coffee county — Know all men by these presents, that we, Gardner Hardy, B. T. Atkinson, John Lindsay, Wesley Lightfoot, Henry Poison, and George Kilpatrick, are held and firmly bound unto Benjamin Fitzpatrick, Governor of this State, and his successors in office, in the penal sum of one thousand dollars, for the true…
1Opinion of the CourtChilton, J.
1. The objection taken to the bond executed by the defendants for the appearance of the prisoner, Gardner Hardy, namely, that it is not a sealed instrument, cannot be allowed, to prevail. The cases relied upon by the counsel to sustain it, of Henderson v. Ross, Minor, 421, and Lea v. Adkins, Ib. 187, do indeed support his position, and the principle there decided has since been recognized by this court. Carter v. Penn, 4 Ala. Rep. 140. Which last case was one in which the parties to the instrument had given no intimation in the body thereof of their intention to seal it, or to regard it as a…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Howie v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1840
- Carter v. PennSupreme Court of Alabama · 1842
- Farr v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1844
3Cited by7 opinions
- Arthur v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1996
- Gladden v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1868
- Hays v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1985
- Ogle v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1872
- Moore v. LeseurSupreme Court of Alabama · 1851
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.