Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

23 Ind. 228

Winninger v. State

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided November 15, 1864

Indiana Supreme Court · decided 1864-11-15

<p>Recognizance.—Complaint on a forfeited recognizance. Breach, failure of principal to appear according to the terms. Answer, by surety, that' after forfeiture, and before commencement of suit, principal had enlisted as a volunteer in the army, and surety could not surrender him.</p> <p>Mield, that this is no defense.</p>

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently July 1871

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1864-11-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Erazer, J.

¶1To a complaint upon a forfeited recognizance taken in a criminal case, alleging for breach the failure of the principal to appear according to the terms of the condition, an answer was filed by the surety, alleging that, after the recognizance was forfeited, and before the commencement of the suit, the principal enlisted as a volunteer in the army; wherefore the surety could not surrender him.

¶2This is no defense. Eor aught that appears, the principal enlisted by the surety’s advice; nor do we know that the military authorities would not at any time surrender him to the surety on application.

¶3The judgment is affirmed, with two per cent, damages and costs.

/23/ind/228 · .json · Public domain