New York Supreme Court, 1825

Mumford v. Armstrong

Mumford v. Armstrong
New York Supreme Court · Decided August 15, 1825
4 Cow. 553

Counsel

J. Bradish, for the motion., L. F. Stevens, contra.

Mumford v. Armstrong

Opinion of the Court

Curia.

In the Bank of Orange v. Wakeman, (1 Cowen’s Rep. 46,) we held that the sheriff’s taking a promissory note for the money upon ajñ. fa. in his hands would not operate as payment, even though he returned the exe*554cution satisfied. The draft, in this instance, not being a payment, the act of permitting the defendant to go at large was a voluntary escape, and the plaintiff clearly had a tight to issue another ca. sa. and proceed to the second arrest.(a) The sheriff could receive nothing in payment but money, or us equivalent.

Motion denied.

See 1 R. L. 426, s. 24. 8 John. Rep. 361.

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