People v. Rossiter
New York Supreme Court
Judgment was obtained against the defendant, an attorney.of this .Copit, dor blerk’-s fees due ¡to the plaintiffs, under a ca. sa. upon which judgment he was imprisoneu, after he had obtained his discharge under the act to abolish imprisonment for debt in certain cases. (Sess. 42, ch. 101.) The assignment was executed after the debt arose; and now, on an affidavit showing these facts,
1Opinion of the Court
Curia.
The motion must be denied. The people are not bound by an act of this kind, unless they are named in it. The rule is the same as in England. The king is not bound by a bankrupt law unless named ;(a) and the people are the king for the purposes of this rule.
Motion denied.
Anonymous, 1 Atk, 262. Rex v. Pixley, Bunb. 202. This question is fully examined, in reference to the statute, of limitations by Mr. Justice Story in U. States v. Hoar, (2 Mason’s Rep. 311-12, &c.) and vid. U. States v. Wilson, (8 Wheat. 253,) that a state insolvent law shall not bind the United States.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- United States v. WilsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1823
3Cited by7 opinions
- Skelly v. Westminster School DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- Trustees for the Support of Public Schools v. Inhabitants of TrentonSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1879
- In re City of UticaNew York Supreme Court · 1893
- United States v. HewesDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1840
- United States v. TetlowDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1872
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.