Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

13 Jones & S. 334

Schmidt v. Heitner

The Superior Court of New York City · decided 1879-06-13

<p>Execution against the person.</p> <p>Section 572 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides that an. execution against the person must be issued within three months after entry of judgment, where the defendant is in actual custody by virtue of an order of arrest in the action.</p> <p>A defendant released from the order of arrest in the action, and on bail, is not in actual custody within the true intent and meaning of the term, as used in the section referred to.</p> <p>It seems that, in case of bail to the limits of the jail, a different rule prevsils, for in such case the person is really imprisoned upon an execution, within the limits of the jail.</p>

Relies on Bostwick v. . Goetzel · Peck v. Corning

Decided 1879-06-13

By the Court.—Freedman, J.

¶1I do not see how the order appealed from can be sustained. Section 572 of the Code of Civil Procedure applies only to defendants in actual custody. A defendant released on bail is not in actual custody, within the true intent and meaning of the term, as used in the section referred to.

¶2Section 288 of the former Code contained a similar provision, and, in Bostwick v. Goetzel (57 N. Y. 582, affirming 34 N. Y. Super. Ct. 23), was held inapplicable to the case of a defendant at large on bail. Coman v. Storm (2 How. Pr. 84) is not in point. In that case the defendant, though enjoying the liberties of the jail, was really imprisoned, upon an execution against his person, within the limits of the jail.

¶3The order should be reversed, with costs, and the motion denied, with ten dollars costs.

¶4Sedgwick, J., concurred.

/13/joness/334 · .json · Public domain