Joice v. James
| Decision Date | 31 August 1855 |
| Docket Number | No. 106.,106. |
| Citation | 18 Ga. 725 |
| Parties | William A. Joice, plaintiff in error. vs. James and Peter Scales, defendants in error. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Illegality, in Bibb Superior Court. Heard and decided by Judge Powers, May Term, 1855.
William A. Joice was arrested under a capias ad satisfaciendem, issued from the Superior Court of Bibb County at the instance of J. and P. Scales.
The defendant filed an affidavit of illegality to the ca. sa. alleging that the same was proceeding against him illegally, because "the obligation upon which said judgment is founded, was made in the State of North Carolina; and that defendant had been, by the judgment of a Court of competent jurisdiction, in that State, discharged from arrest and imprisonment on account of the debt upon which the present ca. sa. had issued, " which plea or ground Counsel for plaintiff moved the Court to strike out. The Court sustained the motion, and Counsel for defendant excepted.
Coney; Miller & Hall, for plaintiff.
Rutherford, for defendants.
By the Court.—Starnes J. delivering the opinion.
We may safely assume, as a general principle, that the lex loci applies only to the interpretation of contracts totheir construction, and that the remedy on them must he prosecuted according to the laws of the country in which the action is brought. This rule is approved by our reason; and it seems to be now regarded, generally, as the correct rule in the Courts of England and of the United States. It has the sanction of learned Jurists in other countries, as is shown by Judge Story, in his Conflict of Laws, §§573, 574.
Under the effect of this rule, if a party be discharged from imprisonment only, he remains liable to arrest for the same debt in another State; for the imprisonment is only one method of enforcing the remedy, and in no wise has relation to the contract.
Some conflict with this doctrine may perhaps be found in a few cases; but it probably has its origin in the case of Molan vs. Fitz James, (1 Bos. & P. 138;) and arises out of a misapprehension of that case. That was a case where a bond was given in France, not binding on the person of the obligor, according to the contract. It was sued in England; and Lord Ch. J. Eyere held, that " if it appears that this contract creates no personal obligation, and that it could not be sued as such by the laws of France, there seems to be a fair ground which the Court may interpose to prevent a proceeding so oppressive as a personal arrest in a foreign country, " &c. Again, he says, ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Beauchamp v. Bertig
...give to the laws of one State complete operation in another--would be to make a judgment in one State bind property in another." Joice v. Scales, 18 Ga. 725; 23 Cyc. 1546, and 1556, 1557, and cases cited in notes; McElmoyle v. Cohen, 13 Peters 312; Brengle v. McClellan, 7 G. & J. 434, 438; ......
-
Beauchamp v. Bertig
...give to the laws of one state complete operation in another — would be to make a judgment in one state bind property in another." Joice v. Scales, 18 Ga. 725; 23 Cyc. 1545, 1546, 1556, 1557, and cases cited in notes; McElmoyle v. Cohen, 13 Pet. 312 10 L. Ed. 177; Brengle v. McClellan, 7 Gil......
-
General Elec. Credit Corp. v. Home Indem. Co., 66377
...According to established precepts, contract remedies are controlled by the place where the action is instituted--the lex fori. Joice v. Scales, 18 Ga. 725. On the other hand, the validity, nature, construction and interpretation of a contract are properly predicated on the law of the lex lo......
-
Federal Ins. Co. v. National Distributing Co., Inc.
...concern the substantive contractual rights and obligations of the parties and not questions of remedy or procedure. Compare Joice v. Scales, 18 Ga. 725 (1) (1855) (cited in General Elec., 2. Since the injured party in this case is a Georgia resident, compare Cunninghame v. Equitable Life As......