Carey v. Osgood
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Debt on a bond given by Osgood, as principal, and the other defendants as sureties, dated June 6, 1839, to procure the liberation of Osgood from arrest on an execution against him in favor of the plaintiff, under the poor debtor acts of 1835 and 1836. On December 6, 1839, Osgood submitted himself to examination before two justices of the peace and of the quorum, and was admitted to take the poor debtor’s oath and discharged.
Read the full summary
Debt on a bond given by Osgood, as principal, and the other defendants as sureties, dated June 6, 1839, to procure the liberation of Osgood from arrest on an execution against him in favor of the plaintiff, under the poor debtor acts of 1835 and 1836. On December 6, 1839, Osgood submitted himself to examination before two justices of the peace and of the quorum, and was admitted to take the poor debtor’s oath and discharged. The justices certified, that Osgood had caused “ Ezra Carey, of, &c., the creditor at whose suit he was so arrested, to be notified according to law, of his, the said…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was drawn up by
Weston C. J.
It appears to us, that the opinion of this Court, in Agry v. Betts et al. 3 Fairf. 415, is well sustained, upon legal principles, and that it is decisive in this case. The *154language of the statute of 1822, c. 209, <§> 13, there commented upon, authorizes the justices to examine the return of the notification ; and if it shall appear to be duly made, to administer the oath. The statute of 1835, c. 195, <§> 10, provides, that the justices may examine the notification and return, and if regular and in due form, are to proceed; and if they…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Buckley v. PageU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Maine · 1860