Smith v. Birdsall
9 Johns. 328
Opinion
The above charges are reasonable and just, and no more than an indemnity. The defendant appears' to have been in contempt, and, consequently, liable to the costs and expenses of [329] the attachment. The habeas corpus act allows 12 1-2 cetns a mile, for bringing up a person, and the charges, also, for taking him back, if remanded~ Where the Jaw is silent as to charges for particular services, the court, if they allow any thing, must allow what is reasonable.
, Judgment for the plaintiff.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Smith v. Birdsall, 9 Johns. 328 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1812).
9 Johns. 328 (Smith v. Birdsall) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Crofut v. Brandt
46 How. Pr. 481 (New York Court of Common Pleas, 1874)
Burnham v. President of the Savings Bank
5 N.H. 446 (Superior Court of New Hampshire, 1831)
The Trial
24 F. Cas. 185 (S.D. New York, 1830)
Eastman v. Coos Bank
1 N.H. 23 (Superior Court of New Hampshire, 1817)