Vanderpool v. Kissam

The Superior Court of New York City

Vanderpool v. Kissam

6 Sandf. 715

CourtThe Superior Court of New York City

DecidedMarch 13, 1852

StatusPublished

This text of 6 Sandf. 715 (Vanderpool v. Kissam) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering The Superior Court of New York City primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Vanderpool v. Kissam, 6 Sandf. 715 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1852).

Pincite

Opinion

Upon a motion to discharge the defendant, Kissam, from arrest, it was decided by

Duer, J'.,

at chambers, after a consultation with all the Justices, that in an action for a malicious prosecution, an affidavit for holding the defendant to bail is insufficient, when it states only in general terms the existence of malice and the want of probable cause. The facts which are relied on as prima facie evidence of the want of probable cause, must be set forth in the affidavit, so as to enable the 'judge, to whom the application for an order of arrest is made, to draw the proper conclusion of law. If such facts are omitted, the party swears only to his own belief, and his opinion, or that of his counsel, is substituted for a judicial decision.

Upon this ground, as well as upon affidavits on the part of the defendant, proving the existence of probable cause, the motion for his discharge was granted.

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

Upon a motion to discharge the defendant, Kissam, from arrest, it was decided by

Duer, J'.,

at chambers, after a consultation with all the Justices, that in an action for a malicious prosecution, an affidavit for holding the defendant to bail is insufficient, when it states only in general terms the existence of malice and the want of probable cause. The facts which are relied on as prima facie evidence of the want of probable cause, must be set forth in the affidavit, so as to enable the 'judge, to whom the application for an order of arrest is made, to draw the proper conclusion of law. If such facts are omitted, the party swears only to his own belief, and his opinion, or that of his counsel, is substituted for a judicial decision.

Upon this ground, as well as upon affidavits on the part of the defendant, proving the existence of probable cause, the motion for his discharge was granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

6 Sandf. 715, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vanderpool-v-kissam-nysuperctnyc-1852.