Hubbard v. Shaler
Supreme Court of Connecticut
In the Court below, rap I HIS was a petition against the County of Middlesex, to recover damages for the escape of one Jonathan Keeney, by reason of the insufficiency of the gaol.
Read the full summary
In the Court below, rap I HIS was a petition against the County of Middlesex, to recover damages for the escape of one Jonathan Keeney, by reason of the insufficiency of the gaol. The material facts stated in the petition, and found by the Court, were the following : On the 19th of April, 1802, Shaler brought an action on contract, against Keeney, by-process of attachment, returnable to the County Court, in November, 1802 ; and on the same day, attached his body ; and for want of bail, committed him to prison. The writ was duly returned, and entered in the docket; and, by legal removes, came…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court
unanimously, the judgment was affirmed. Regarding the first question, The principle assumed by the counsel for the plaintiff in error was correct; but it proved the judgment to have been well founded. As to all the damages alleged, inquiry was competent;—inquiry was made ; and the Court gave the principal, interest, and costs, which they had an unquestionable right to do.
Respecting the second point, The law of Connecticut has its system relative to bail, and to imprisonment; systems entirely distinct ; both resting on statutes ; and (if there be some analogy) the most simple mode…
2Cited by3 opinions
- De Myer v. McGonegalMichigan Supreme Court · 1875
- Bergkofski v. RuzofskiSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1901
- Palmer v. GallupSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1844