Sweeney v. Gillooly
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract on a recognizance under the Gen. Sts. c. 124, § 10. submitted to the judgment of the court upon facts agreed, of which the following is the substance : On November 3, 1868, John F. Sloan (one of the defendants, and the principal in the recognizance) was arrested on an execution in favor of the plaintiff, and desiring to take the oath for the relief of poor debtors, entered, with Thomas Gillooly, the other defendant, as surety, into a recognizance under the Gen. Sts.…
Read the full summary
Contract on a recognizance under the Gen. Sts. c. 124, § 10. submitted to the judgment of the court upon facts agreed, of which the following is the substance : On November 3, 1868, John F. Sloan (one of the defendants, and the principal in the recognizance) was arrested on an execution in favor of the plaintiff, and desiring to take the oath for the relief of poor debtors, entered, with Thomas Gillooly, the other defendant, as surety, into a recognizance under the Gen. Sts. c. 124, § 10, in the usual form, conditioned “ that the said Sloan, within thirty days from the time of his arrest as…
1Opinion of the CourtColt, J.
The defendant’s discharge, granted upon a delivery of himself for examination within thirty days from the day of his arrest, and upon notice to the creditor, with no default or failure to abide the order of the court, on the proceedings then commenced and carried to their regular termination, as required by Gen. Sts. c. 124, is a good defence to this action. There was a strict compliance with the terms of the recognizance. And the effect of the proceedings is not impaired by the fact that he had made a prior application to another magistrate, and failed to appear for examination at the time…
2Cited by2 opinions
- State v. ThompsonSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1888
- Millett v. LemonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1873