Kirk v. United States

Second Circuit

Kirk v. United States

130 F. 112, 64 C.C.A. 446, 1904 U.S. App. LEXIS 4144

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·Decided January 25, 1904·No. No. 128·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We are of the opinion that it was a proper exercise of the court’s discretion to preserve the status quo until it shall be determined by proof on the trial whether or not the person named in the recognizance was taken into the custody of the court under such circumstances as to relieve the surety, and whether the order forfeiting and estreating the recognizance was in fact made before the time when such person was ordered to appear.

The order is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

We are of the opinion that it was a proper exercise of the court’s discretion to preserve the status quo until it shall be determined by proof on the trial whether or not the person named in the recognizance was taken into the custody of the court under such circumstances as to relieve the surety, and whether the order forfeiting and estreating the recognizance was in fact made before the time when such person was ordered to appear.

The order is affirmed.

Kirk v. United States, 130 F. 112, 64 C.C.A. 446, 1904 U.S. App. LEXIS 4144 (2d Cir. 1904).

Pincite

130 F. 112 (Kirk v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.