Harrington v. Dennie

13 Mass. 93
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided March 15, 1816·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

Parker, C. J.,

delivered the opinion of the Court. It is well settled, that whatever would render the arrest unlawful, or ineffectual by operation of law, the bail may show in answer to the scire facias. The case cited from Douglas is strong to this point. A rule was obtained, to show cause why an exoneretur should not be entered on the bail-piece, the principal having become a peer by succession. The ground of the motion was, that it was no longer in the power of the bail to surrender the principal; and the rule was made absolute.

It is true, that, in the case cited, this motion was made in the original action ; and the defence now set up is to the scire facias. But by our statute respecting bail,

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

Harrington v. Dennie, 13 Mass. 93 (Mass. 1816).

13 Mass. 93 (Harrington v. Dennie) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Commonwealth v. Bautista
945 N.E.2d 341 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 2011)
Potter v. Rio Arriba L. & C. Co.
4 N.M. 322 (New Mexico Supreme Court, 1888)
State v. Scott
20 Iowa 63 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1865)
Alford v. Irwin
34 Ga. 25 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1864)
Lowell v. Haskell
45 Me. 112 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1858)
Craggin v. Bailey
23 Me. 104 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1843)
Goodwin v. Smith
4 N.H. 29 (Superior Court of New Hampshire, 1827)
Champion v. Noyes
2 Mass. 481 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1807)