In re Seymour
District Court, S.D. New York
This case came tip on a writ of habeas corpus issued, on the petition of James W. Seymour, to the sheriff of the city and county of New’ York, in whose' custody he was held.
Read the full summary
This case came tip on a writ of habeas corpus issued, on the petition of James W. Seymour, to the sheriff of the city and county of New’ York, in whose' custody he was held. The sheriff returned to the writ, that he arrested Seymour and took him into custody on the 3d of September, I860, by virtue of an order of arrest issued by a justice of the superior court of the city of New York, under the Code of Procedure of the state of New York, in a civil action in that court, wherein Constantine Rosswog was plaintiff and the petitioner was defendant; that Seymour remained in his custody under said…
1Opinion of the Court
BLATCHFORD, District Judge.
The twenty-sixth section of the bankruptcy act provides as follows: “No bankrupt shall be liable to arrest during the pendency of the proceedings in bankruptcy, in any civil action, unless the same is founded on some debtor claim from which his discharge in bankruptcy would not release him.” The purport of this provision of the twenty-sixth section is, that no person shall be held under arrest, or suffer imprisonment, in any civil action, during the pendency of proceedings in bankruptcy by or against him, whether he is first put under arrest after the commencement…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Donald v. KellIndiana Supreme Court · 1887
- Haggerty v. BadkinNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1907
- People ex rel. Taranto v. ErlangerDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1904
- Chipley v. FriersonSupreme Court of Florida · 1882
- Crosby v. Miller, Vaughn & Co.Supreme Court of Rhode Island · 1903