Hyperlawhypertext legal database Cross v. Hobson 2 Cai. 102

← Cases

Cross v. Hobson

2 Cai. 102 Court N.Y. Sup. Ct. English

Contents

Majority

p. 102
Cross, Jun. against Hobson.

Headnote

If a defendant do not plead his discharge under the insolvent law, this conn will not afford relief on a summary application.
This was an application to be discharged out of custody the defendant having been exonerated from" the demand under the insolvent law.

The defendant can take nothing by his motion. In the cause of Caldwell v. Graham, decided in January term, 1803, we determined we would not help an insolvent who omitted to plead his discharge as he might have done.[1]

Motion denied.

[1] [1] See case of Shaw v. Wilmerden, 2 Cai. R. 38 ; Van Valkenbergh v. Dederick, 1 J. C 133; see Billings v. Skutt, 1 J. C. 105.