Wells v. Jones
New York Supreme Court
Appeal from an order granting writ of supersedeas. The plaintiff brought his action, and recovered judgment, in the county of Schoharie. At the commencement of the suit he obtained an order of arrest, under which the defendant was taken, on the 6th January, 1852, and held to bail. After the plaintiff obtained judgment, no execution having been issued, the defendant’s bail surrendered him, and on 19th July, 1854, were exonerated.
Read the full summary
Appeal from an order granting writ of supersedeas. The plaintiff brought his action, and recovered judgment, in the county of Schoharie. At the commencement of the suit he obtained an order of arrest, under which the defendant was taken, on the 6th January, 1852, and held to bail. After the plaintiff obtained judgment, no execution having been issued, the defendant’s bail surrendered him, and on 19th July, 1854, were exonerated. On the 30th January, 1855, on application of the defendant, a judge of the first district granted an order to show cause why a writ of supersedeas should not be…
1Opinion of the CourtCowles, J.
By 2 Revised Statutes, 556, sections 36 and 37, the defendant was authorized to apply to “ any judge of the court” for the order of supersedeas here asked for ; and notwithstanding the provisions of section 401 of the Code, I think he may do so still, and make his application in the first district, although the venue in the action is elsewhere.
The right to apply for such supersedeas, under the Revised *21Statutes, as above stated, was an “ existing statutory provision” when the Code took effect, relating to the action in which such motion was made, was not “ inconsistent” with the Code, and in…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Bostwick v. . GoetzelNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
- Moulton v. BeecherNew York Supreme Court · 1876
- Bostwick v. WildeyThe Superior Court of New York City · 1871
- People ex rel. Haskin v. Supervisors of WestchesterNew York Supreme Court · 1870