Irwin v. Caryell

New York Supreme Court

Irwin v. Caryell

8 Johns. 407

CourtNew York Supreme Court

DecidedOctober 15, 1811

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 8 Johns. 407 (Irwin v. Caryell) 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

Irwin v. Caryell, 8 Johns. 407 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1811).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The justice ought to have released the bail, by taking the other security offered. It would be unreasonable and unjust to deprive the party of the benefit of a material witness, when his interest can be thus discharged, without injury to the other party. Sound and legal discretion required that it should be done. It is the practice for the court to discharge the bail upon application, when he is wanted as a witness for the defendant. (Sty. 385.)

Judgment reversed.

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

Per Curiam.

The justice ought to have released the bail, by taking the other security offered. It would be unreasonable and unjust to deprive the party of the benefit of a material witness, when his interest can be thus discharged, without injury to the other party. Sound and legal discretion required that it should be done. It is the practice for the court to discharge the bail upon application, when he is wanted as a witness for the defendant. (Sty. 385.)

Judgment reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

8 Johns. 407, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/irwin-v-caryell-nysupct-1811.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack