Robinson v. Soule

Mississippi Supreme Court January 15, 1879

Robinson v. Soule, 56 Miss. 549 (Miss. 1879)

Campbell

Opinion of the Court

Campbell, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

The discharge in bankruptcy of Shotwell & Fitts did not prevent the rendition, “in said suit,” of a judgment for the restoration of the goods ; and, as plaintiff in error was bound by his undertaking, as surety on the replevin bond, for the forthcoming of the goods, “ to abide the judgment of the court in said suit,” he was not released from his obligation by the discharge of Shotwell & Fitts. Eyster v. Gaff et al., 91 U. S. 521; Wolf et al. v. Stix (MS.), U. S. Sup. Ct.

*552The bankruptcy of plaintiff in error, followed by a composition with creditors, with no mention of defendants in error as creditors, did not furnish a reason for refusing or delaying judgment against him.

Judgment affirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name: W. W. Robinson v. Soule, Thomas & Wentworth
Cited By: 1 case
Status: Published
Syllabus: 1. Replevin. Forthcoming bond. Discharge in bankruptcy. Judgment. Where a defendant in an action of replevin has given a bond for the forthcoming of the property, and afterwards, becoming bankrupt, receives his discharge in bankruptcy, judgment may be rendered against him for the restoration of the property, notwithstanding his discharge. 2. Same. Fonühaoming bond. Discharge of principal. Effect as to surety. A surety in a forthcoming bond in replevin is not released from the obligations of the bond by the discharge in bankruptcy of his principal. 3. Bankruptcy. Composition. Creditor not participating unaffected. A composition between a debtor and his creditors generally, under the bankrupt laws, does not affect a creditor of the bankrupt whose claim was not considered in the composition, and whose name was not mentioned in the proceedings thereof.