Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

18 Johns. 252

Ludlow v. Hackett

New York Supreme Court

Decided August 15, 1820

New York Supreme Court · decided 1820-08-15

THE defendant was' arrested in May, 1819, at the suit of the plaintiff, for 2,000 dollars ; and in July following, was regularly discharged, under the act to abolish imprisonment for debt, in certain cases, passed April 7, 1819. (sess. 42. 101.) After the discharge, the attorney for the plaintiff entered the default of the defendant for not pleading, and af-terwards entered an interlocutory judgment, and had the damages assessed, on a.writ of inquiry.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently December 1879

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1820-08-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Per Curiam.

¶1In Heffernan v. Brown, we decided, at the last term, that where a defendant obtains a discharge under the act giving relief in cases of imprisonment, the plaintiff might discontinue his suit without costs, in the same manner as if the defendant had been discharged from all his debts under the insolvent act. If the plaintiff, knowing of the defendant’s discharge, will, nevertheless, go on with the suit, he must, if he afterwards discontinues, pay costs. Let the plaintiff have leave to discontinue his suit on payment of the costs of suit since the defendant obtained his discharge under the late act, and up to the time of the entry of the rule for a discontinuance, exclusive of the costs of the application made at the last term.

¶2Rule accordingly.

/18/johns/252 · .json · Public domain