New York Supreme Court, 1806

Steevens & Waters v. Clancey

Steevens & Waters v. Clancey
New York Supreme Court · Decided August 15, 1806
1 Johns. 521

Counsel

Fan Vechten for the plaintiff in error., Hildreth, contra.

Steevens & Waters v. Clancey

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

The bail-bond was sufficiently descriptive and certain, as to the court and place of the defendant’s appearance. The law only requires, that they should be substantially set forth in the bail-bond. We think that the declaration was certain enough, as to the court at which the defendant was to appear, and these were all the causes of demurrer, on which the judgment was given in the court' below.

Judgment affirmed.

2 Saunders, 60. a. b. and the cases cited in the notes.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.