Ex parte Haley v. Supervisors of Ulster

12 Wend. 237
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedNovember 20, 1834
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 12 Wend. 237 (Ex parte Haley v. Supervisors of Ulster) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Ex parte Haley v. Supervisors of Ulster, 12 Wend. 237 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1834).

Opinion

By the Court,

Sutherland, J.

The principle upon which the relator insisted before the supervisors, and now here, is undoubtedly the general principle upon which fees are charged in analogous cases. Where a capias is issued against several individuals, it is believed to be the universal practice for the sheriff to charge full mileage from the court house to the residence of each defendant, and the propriety of the charge, so far as I am informed, has never been questioned. The provision, that mileage shall be allowed only on the distance actually and necessarily travelled, 2 R. S. 750, § 4, was not intended, I apprehend, to apply to a case like this. If the subpoena is to be considered a separate writ for each witness named in it, then the distance travelled to each must be determined without any reference to the others. It is in the power of the district attorney to issue a subpoena for each witness, and he may include several in the same writ; upon the principle contended for by the supervisors, the district attorney therefore may, at his pleasure, enlarge or restrict'the compensation of the constable, in cases where the services actually performed by him are precisely the same. The right of constables ought to be more certain and fixed. The limitation in the act may well be satisfied, by allowing the constable to charge for travel only by the nearest and most direct road to each witness. I think the act will admit of this construction; and the compensation which it will give to these officers for this branch of their services, is by no means unreasonable or extravagant.

The principle which I have stated, will enable the parties to dispose of this case according to their stipulation-or agreement.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Ehlers v. Blood
175 Misc. 72 (New York Supreme Court, 1940)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
12 Wend. 237, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ex-parte-haley-v-supervisors-of-ulster-nysupct-1834.