From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hudson v. Howell

U.S.
Jan 1, 1788
1 U.S. 310 (1788)

Opinion

JUNE TERM, 1788.


TRESPASS vi et armis. Capias returnable to this Term. Howell moved to quash the writ, the Defendant being a Freeholder.

Millegan objected that this was a case excepted by the act; a fine being due to the Commonwealth, upon the Judgment capiatur pra fine, in action vi et armis.


The practice has been long settled under this act. Unless it is a suit on a recognizance, or for a fine actually due to the State, we cannot take up a mere fictition, to defeat a positive privilege.

The writ quashed.


Summaries of

Hudson v. Howell

U.S.
Jan 1, 1788
1 U.S. 310 (1788)
Case details for

Hudson v. Howell

Case Details

Full title:HUDSON versus HOWELL

Court:U.S.

Date published: Jan 1, 1788

Citations

1 U.S. 310 (1788)