Witt v. Follett
New York Supreme Court
This was an action on a promissory note made in New-Hampshire whilst both parties were inhabitants of that state. The note fell due in December, 1820. On the 7th September, 1821, the defendant obtained a discharge in this state jfrom his debts as an insolvent debtor, under the act of 1813, he as well as the plaintiff having become inhabitants herej and pleaded the discharge in bar of the action. On demurrer, the plea was overruled.
Read the full summary
This was an action on a promissory note made in New-Hampshire whilst both parties were inhabitants of that state. The note fell due in December, 1820. On the 7th September, 1821, the defendant obtained a discharge in this state jfrom his debts as an insolvent debtor, under the act of 1813, he as well as the plaintiff having become inhabitants herej and pleaded the discharge in bar of the action. On demurrer, the plea was overruled. (2 Wendell, 457.) The suit was then brought to trial on the general issue, and the defendant offered his discharge in evidence, to induce the entry of a limited…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Marcy, J.
We are asked to qualify the judgment' in this case, and to give such effect to the discharge as that it shall exempt the body of the defendant from impris-' onment This, I apprehend, would be giving an operation *502to the act of 1813 not directly contemplated by it. It authorizes the discharge of the insolvent from imprisonment if in prison .at the time of the assignment. An exemption from imprisonment generally results from the validity of a discharge from the debts ; but the discharge in this case as to its main object in relation to this debt being void, it cannot have…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Jones v. KirkseySupreme Court of Alabama · 1846