Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

8 Johns. 339

M'Lean v. Whiting

New York Supreme Court

Decided August 15, 1811

New York Supreme Court · decided 1811-08-15

H. BLEECKER, for the defendant, moved that he _ . be discharged from imprisonment, on a ca. sa. issued m this cause. The affidavit of the defendant stated, that he was sued by bill, on a bond executed by him and Daniel Powers, by which they were, jointly and severally, bound to the .

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently May 1812

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1811-08-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Per Curiam.

¶1. The defendant, Whiting, is charged in execution, for two of the instalments, but not for any costs, and Powers was charged in execution only for the costs of the suit against him. His discharge from these costs does not, and ought not, to affect the execution against Whiting; for the demands were distinct, and Whiting was never answerable for those costs. The rule that a release of one co-obligor from his debt, or a discharge of one co-obligor from execution, should enure-as a release or discharge of all, is founded upon the just principle, that the party should not receive more than one satisfaction for the same debt, but that principle is -inapplicable to this case. The discharge of Powers from his costs was no satisfaction of the debt for which Whiting was imprisoned; the motion is therefore denied-.

¶2Motion denied.

/8/johns/339 · .json · Public domain