Warner v. North
New York Supreme Court
The defendant, North, had obtained the discharge of his person, under the act to abolish imprisonment for debt in certain cases, (sess. 42, ch. 101.) The discharge was dated Sept. 17, 1819. He was afterwards arrested upon a bailable capias, for a debt due before the assignment.
Read the full summary
The defendant, North, had obtained the discharge of his person, under the act to abolish imprisonment for debt in certain cases, (sess. 42, ch. 101.) The discharge was dated Sept. 17, 1819. He was afterwards arrested upon a bailable capias, for a debt due before the assignment. He suggested to the Sheriff that he had been discharged, notwitstanding which a bail bond was exacted and taken ; and for want of special bail, a suit had been commenced thereon, the capias wherein was returnable the present term. Both the plaintiff and his attorney were, in fact, ignorant of the discharge, and so…
1Opinion of the Court
Curia.
The mere fact of the discharge, without its production, is not notice to the plaintiff, or the Sheriff. If the plaintiff knows of its existence, and, notwithstanding, holds the defendant to bail, without a prev ious order, he would be punishable for the irregularity. But the proceedings of the plaintiff, in this instance, have arisen from the silence of the defendant; and he has misled the plaintiff still farther, by giving a bail bond to the Sheriff. lie ought to pay the costs which the plaintiff has incurred through this fault. Let the proceedings in the bail bond suit be set aside,…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Shipman v. HortonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1846