Lovell v. Orser
The Superior Court of New York City
This action comes before the Court at General Term, on an appeal, by the defendant, from a judgment rendered against Mm at Special Term. It is an action for an escape. On the seventh of June, 1853, the plaintiffs in this action commenced a suit in this Court against Hubbard and Barton, and obtained an order for their arrest, directed to the defendant, as sheriff, and, as appears by the defendant’s official certificate, they were, on the same day, arrested.
Read the full summary
This action comes before the Court at General Term, on an appeal, by the defendant, from a judgment rendered against Mm at Special Term. It is an action for an escape. On the seventh of June, 1853, the plaintiffs in this action commenced a suit in this Court against Hubbard and Barton, and obtained an order for their arrest, directed to the defendant, as sheriff, and, as appears by the defendant’s official certificate, they were, on the same day, arrested. Judgment in favor of the plaintiffs in that action was perfected, July 5, 1853, and an execution against property was issued thereon, and…
1Opinion of the CourtBy the Court. Hoffman, J.
The only question in the cause arises upon the refusal of the Judge to admit the testimony offered to show that, the attorney of the plaintiffs in the suit against "Hubbard and Barton gave a consent to his going to Philadelphia for the purpose of raising money to pay the judgment. This was rejected on the ground that such a consent would not of itself, and alone, avail as a defence to the sheriff.
We consider this ruling to have been correct.
The case of Kellogg v. Gilbert (10 John Rep. 220) settled this point; and was very much like the present in its circumstances.
Dexter v. Adams (2 Denio,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Dexter v. AdamsNew York Supreme Court · 1846
3Cited by1 opinion
- Eads v. WynneNew York Supreme Court · 1894