Pasternacki v. O'Reilly

185 N.W. 739, 217 Mich. 56, 1921 Mich. LEXIS 819
CourtMichigan Supreme Court
DecidedDecember 21, 1921
DocketDocket No. 81
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 185 N.W. 739 (Pasternacki v. O'Reilly) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Pasternacki v. O'Reilly, 185 N.W. 739, 217 Mich. 56, 1921 Mich. LEXIS 819 (Mich. 1921).

Opinion

Steere, C. J.

On October 24, 1919, plaintiff recovered a judgment of $1,919 with costs in the circuit court of Wayne county against one James J. Dunn in an action of trespass on the case for conversion. A property execution having been returned nulla bona a writ of capias ad satisfaciendum was issued on said judgment. The sheriff of Wayne county served said writ upon Dunn and took him into custody, as appears by his return thereto made May 12, 1920, in regular [57]*57form except the added sentence, “I further certify and return that on the 11th day of May the said defendant was released by order of Judge Harry J. Dingeman, of the circuit court.”

On May 11, 1920, a writ of habeas corpus to inquire into the cause of detention of said Dunn was allowed and issued from the circuit court of Wayne county and served upon the sheriff under direction of Dunn’s attorney late that evening. It was in usual form. Upon it was indorsed:

“To the sheriff: On presentation of the above writ, release petitioner, James J. Dunn, to appear May 12, 1920, at 9:80 a. m. before the undersigned.
“Harry J. Dingeman,
“Circuit Judge.”

Return of the sheriff to this writ, made May 12, 1920, follows the usual form of return in such cases. It states said Dunn “is now in my custody under and by virtue of the said alias writ of capias ad satisfaciendum,” makes reference to copies of the proceedings and judgment on which it was issued, attached as exhibits, and concludes: “all of which I certify, and have here the body of the said James Dunn as by the writ I am commanded.” Dunn appeared before the court with his counsel on May 12th, at the appointed time, when his habeas corpus case was taken up, and several adjournments were thereafter had to permit his counsel to interpose a motion to quash the writ of capias ad satisfaciendum. He was at large during the interval, but appeared with his counsel before the court on each adjourned day including May 26, 1920. On that date after denial of his motion to quash the capias the court made and entered the following order:

“James J.' Dunn having been brought before this court upon, a writ of habeas corpus heretofore issued out of said court, directed to Irving J. Coffin, sheriff [58]*58of the said county of Wayne, for the purpose of inquiring into the cause of his imprisonment, and it appearing to the said court by the return of the said Irving J. Coffin to the said writ and upon the hearing thereof, that the said James J. Dunn is legally imprisoned and detained under and by virtue of an execution duly issued upon a final judgment rendered in the circuit court for the county of Wayne in favor of Stanley A. Pasternacki, as plaintiff, against the said James J. Dunn, as defendant, in an action of trespass, it is thereupon ordered that the said James J. Dunn be and he is hereby remanded into the custody of the said Irving J. Coffin and to his former imprisonment under the execution aforesaid.”

Following the order and while he was yet in court an order was made on application of his counsel admitting him to bail pending determination by the Supreme Court of a proposed review of the proceedings then had, and he was ordered released from custody upon giving, a bond of that date with defendant O’Reilly accepted as his surety, in the sum of $4,000, running to the sheriff, conditioned as follows:

“Whereas the above bounden James J. Dunn has lately applied to the circuit court for Wayne county, for a writ of habeas corpus, and whereas the above bounden James J. Dunn is about to have the said application and denial reviewed in the Supreme Court of the State of Michigan:
“Now therefore the condition of this obligation is such, that if the said James J. Dunn shall within ten days after the date of this bond apply to the Supreme Court of the State of Michigan for the issuance of such writ or process as may be necessary to review the said decision of the said circuit court and if the said Supreme Court shall affirm the action of the said circuit court for the county of Wayne in denying the said writ of habeas corpus and if the said James J. Dunn shall within five days after such affirmation on the part of the said Supreme Court, present himself to the circuit court for the county of Wayne to be re.[59]*59manded into the custody of the sheriff of Wayne county in the said State of Michigan, then this obligation to be void, otherwise to remain in full force.
(Signed) “James J. Dunn,
(Signed) “Joseph O’Reilly.
(L. S.)”

Indorsed upon the bond appears O’Reilly’s sworn statement that he is worth in unincumbered property not exempt from execution the sum of $10,000.

Within 10 days from that date appeal to this court was taken by writ of error, and also by certiorari, to review said habeas corpus proceedings. The appeal by writ of error was dismissed for lack of prosecution, but the appeal by writ of certiorari was perfected. An order of this court, on January 5, 1921, dismissed said writ of. certiorari and affirmed the order of the circuit court remanding said Dunn to custody. A copy of the order of affirmance was filed in the habeas corpus case in the circuit court of Wayne county on January 6, 1921. Dunn failed to present himself to the circuit court of Wayne county to be remanded into the custody of the sheriff within five days after such affirmation, as required by his bond, or at any later time. On January 11, 1921, after due notice to defendant herein of such default, an. order was entered in the circuit court of Wayne county forfeiting said bond, which order was not appealed from and remains in full force and effect. On the same date plaintiff secured an assignment of said bond from the sheriff and brought this action, which was heard before the court without a jury, findings of fact and conclusions of law thereon being made and filed. Plaintiff had judgment for $2,126.62, being the amount of his judgment against said Dunn with interest and costs.

Briefly summarized, defendant contends that the bond upon which this judgment was taken is unenforceable, without consideration and a nullity for the [60]*60reason that when it was given the sheriff had released Dunn from custody by order of the court, on May 11, 1920, as the sheriff’s return to the cwpias under which he made the arrest shows and—

“the writ having performed its office and been returned was- no longer a valid writ under which Dunn might again be taken, and there was no valid writ outstanding at the time of filing the bond under which Dunn could be placed into custody of the sheriff.”

For record proof of this counsel relies on the concluding sentence of the sheriff’s return to the capias, stating that on May 11th Dunn was released by order of a named judge of the circuit court. That order, indorsed on the writ of habeas corpus issued to inquire into the cause of the petitioner Dunn’s detention under the capias, is to release him “to appear May 12, 1920, at 9:80 a. m. before the undersigned.” On May 12, 1920, the sheriff made return to such writ of habeas corpus that Dunn was then in his custody by virtue of the capias, and Dunn was there in court before the judge as the order enjoined.

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

Related

Title & Trust Co. v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.
7 P.2d 805 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1931)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
185 N.W. 739, 217 Mich. 56, 1921 Mich. LEXIS 819, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pasternacki-v-oreilly-mich-1921.