Bank of Mount Pleasant v. Administrators of Pollock
Ohio Supreme Court
The plaintiffs in this case had obtained a judgment against Joseph MeKaughey, in the common pleas of Belmont county. They sued out a capias ad satisfaciendum, upon which the sheriff returned not found. They then sued out a scire facias against Robert Pollock, which was returned nihil; and a second scire facias was sued out, and returned executed. Robert Pollock appeared .at the return of the second scire facias, and pleaded, that after the .return of the ca. sa.
Read the full summary
The plaintiffs in this case had obtained a judgment against Joseph MeKaughey, in the common pleas of Belmont county. They sued out a capias ad satisfaciendum, upon which the sheriff returned not found. They then sued out a scire facias against Robert Pollock, which was returned nihil; and a second scire facias was sued out, and returned executed. Robert Pollock appeared .at the return of the second scire facias, and pleaded, that after the .return of the ca. sa. “ not found,” and before the return of the first sci. fa. “nihil,” Joseph MeKaughey departed this life. To this plea the plaintiffs…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
Our statute declares that the bail shall be discharged by surrendering the principal upon the return of the first scire facias “ executed,” or the second “nihil.” This is the rule of the English courts. It is, however, one principle of this rule, as established in-. England, that if the principal die after the return of the ca. sa. non-est, the bail is charged. It is maintained for the plaintiffs, that as the legislature has adopted, in substance, the English rule as to-the period at which a surrender shall discharge the bail, they have adopted that rule in all its parts — so…
2Cited by1 opinion
- State v. President & Directors of the Ohio & Mississippi RailroadIndiana Supreme Court · 1864