Hayden v. Adams

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Hayden v. Adams

2 Binn. 232, 1810 Pa. LEXIS 2

DecidedJanuary 3, 1810

StatusPublished

This text of 2 Binn. 232 (Hayden v. Adams) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hayden v. Adams, 2 Binn. 232, 1810 Pa. LEXIS 2 (Pa. 1810).

Pincite

Opinion

Tilghman C. J.

The court are unanimously of opinion, that judgment should be affirmed. The bail bond was forfeited and put in suit, before the implied waiver by accepting a plea took place; and if the defendant was desirous to take advantage of it, he should have applied to the court below by 7notion, to set aside or stay proceedings in the bail bond suit, when justice might have been done according to the circumstances. We must not be understood however to give any sanction to trying matter of record by a jury; but it having been by consent, we do not think it necessary in this instance to notice it.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Tilghman C. J.

The court are unanimously of opinion, that judgment should be affirmed. The bail bond was forfeited and put in suit, before the implied waiver by accepting a plea took place; and if the defendant was desirous to take advantage of it, he should have applied to the court below by 7notion, to set aside or stay proceedings in the bail bond suit, when justice might have been done according to the circumstances. We must not be understood however to give any sanction to trying matter of record by a jury; but it having been by consent, we do not think it necessary in this instance to notice it.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 Binn. 232, 1810 Pa. LEXIS 2, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hayden-v-adams-pa-1810.