Majority
p. 595In the Matter of the Application of the Attorney-General of the State of New York, Respondent. Ludwig C. A. K. Martens, Appellant. (Submitted April 5, 1926; decided May 4, 1926.)
Headnote
Bail —former adjudication — deposit of bond in lieu of bail — denial by Supreme Court of two applications for return thereof — determinations a bar to renewed litigation of same issue.Matter of Attorney-General {Martens), 207 App. Div. 848 , affirmed.
Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered' November 23, 1923, which affirmed an order of Special Term granting a motion to have declared forfeited a bond deposited by appellant herein with the sheriff of the county of New York, under a bailable attachment and directing the said sheriff to deliver the bond and attached coupons or their proceeds to the State Treasurer. Appellant having failed to appear before a legislative committee, pursuant to a subpoena, was arrested under a bailable attachment issued by a Supreme Court justice
p. 596
and thereafter admitted to bail and released upon deposit of the bond in question. He thereafter appeared before the committee but upon his again being required to attend left the State and remained away during the life of the committee. Thereafter, appellant made two applications to the Supreme Court for return of the bond, both of which were denied.
Charles Recht and Osmond K. Fraenkel for appellant.
Albert Ottinger, Attorney-General (.Robert P. Beyer of counsel), for respondent.
Order affirmed, with costs, on the ground that the former adjudication on the application of the appellant for the return of the security is binding on the parties and prevents them from litigating over again the same issue. (Williams v. Barkley, 165 N. Y. 48 .)
Concur: Hiscock, Ch. J., Cardozo, Pound, McLaughlin, Crane, Andrews and Lehman, JJ.
Cases cited
- Williams v. Barkley 165 N. Y. 48 p. 596