Richmond & Richmond v. De Young

3 G. & J. 64
Court of Appeals of Maryland·Decided December 15, 1830·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Buchanan, Ch. J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

We think the special bail in this case was properly exonerated by Baltimore County Court.

As far as we have heen able to trace the subject, it appears to us, to have been long the practice of the courts of this State, to discharge a special bail, on the production of evidence of the release of his principal, under the insolvent laws of another State. It was done by the late General Court, and is done, as far as we can ascertain, by the County Courts in the several judicial districts, in cases similar to this; and seeing nothing opposed to it, in the constitution of the United States, we are not disposed at this late day, to shake a practice so well, and as we think properly established. The judgment of the County Court, is therefore affirmed, with costs.

JUDGMENT AFFIRMED.

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

Richmond & Richmond v. De Young, 3 G. & J. 64 (Md. 1830).

3 G. & J. 64 (Richmond & Richmond v. De Young) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State Ex Rel. Morrow v. Fidelity & Deposit Co.
59 A. 735 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1905)