Zimmerman v. Chrisman

New York Supreme Court

Zimmerman v. Chrisman

7 Hill & Den. 153

DecidedDecember 15, 1844

StatusPublished

This text of 7 Hill & Den. 153 (Zimmerman v. Chrisman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Zimmerman v. Chrisman, 7 Hill & Den. 153 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1844).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court,

Bronson, J.

In actions for defamation, some special reason, beyond a good cause of action, must be shown for holding the defendant to bail; for example, that he is a transient person, residing out of the jurisdiction of the court. (Clason v. Gould, 2 Caines, 47; Van Vechten v. Hopkins, 2 John. 293; Norton v. Barnum, 20 id. 337.) The rule appears [154]*154to be the same in actions for assault and battery. (Bagley's Cham. Prac. 74, 75.) In this case no sufficient reason was stated in the affidavit on which the judge’s order was made.

Motion granted.

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

By the Court,

Bronson, J.

In actions for defamation, some special reason, beyond a good cause of action, must be shown for holding the defendant to bail; for example, that he is a transient person, residing out of the jurisdiction of the court. (Clason v. Gould, 2 Caines, 47; Van Vechten v. Hopkins, 2 John. 293; Norton v. Barnum, 20 id. 337.) The rule appears [154]*154to be the same in actions for assault and battery. (Bagley's Cham. Prac. 74, 75.) In this case no sufficient reason was stated in the affidavit on which the judge’s order was made.

Motion granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

7 Hill & Den. 153, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/zimmerman-v-chrisman-nysupct-1844.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack