People v. Henry

Decision Date09 February 1970
PartiesThe PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Tommy Lee HENRY, Respondent. Cosmopolitan Mutual Insurance Company, Surety-Appellant, et al., Surety.
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

William J. Ciolko, Public Defender, Poughkeepsie, for respondent, Henry, Marshall L. Brenner, Poughkeepsie, of counsel.

Milton S. Herman, Newburgh, for surety-appellant, Cosmopolitan Mutual Ins. Co., Lewis I. Wolf, of Wolfman & Stanger, New York City, of counsel.

Before CHRIST, Acting P.J., and BRENNAN, RABIN, HOPKINS and MUNDER, JJ.

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.

Appeal by Cosmopolitan Mutual Insurance Company from an order of the County Court, Dutchess County, dated May 22, 1969, which granted defendant's motion to reinstate its (appellant's) former liability as surety on a bail bond for defendant.

Order reversed, on the law, without costs, and motion denied.

Defendant was indicted for assault in the second degree and appellant, as surety, posted a $10,000 bail bond for him. The bond provided, as required by section 581 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, that (1) defendant would appear and answer the charge, (2) he would render himself amenable to the process of the court and, (3) if convicted, he would appear for judgment and render himself in execution thereof.

Appellant performed all its obligations under the bond. Defendant was convicted of the crime charged against him and thereupon the Trial Judge remanded him to prison and exonerated appellant from any further liability on the bond. Defendant was sentenced as a second felony offender. As such, he could not obtain release under bail pending appeal, even if a certificate of reasonable doubt could have been obtained for him (Code Crim.Proc., § 555).

The Dutchess County Public Defender was assigned as defendant's counsel to prosecute an appeal on his behalf from the judgment of conviction. Upon the appeal, this court reversed the judgment solely on a question of law and ordered a new trial (People v. Henry, 31 A.D.2d 943, 298 N.Y.S.2d 879). Thereafter, the Dutchess County Public Defender applied for an order reinstating the above-mentioned bail bond, so as to revive appellant's obligation thereunder. Appellant objected thereto. It pointed out that it had been exonerated from liability and that under the circumstances then existing it did not wish to become bail surety for defendant again. However, by the order under review the application was granted and defendant was ordered released.

In our opinion, this extension of appellant's contractual liability as surety on the bail bond, over its objection, contravenes the well established rule that a surety's obligation is construed Strictissimi juris in the surety's favor. Accordingly, its liability may not be extended unless clearly authorized by its contract (Becker v. Faber, 280 N.Y. 146, 149, 19 N.E.2d 997, 999, 121 A.L.R. 1010). Appellant's contract as bail surety for defen...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Com. v. Stuyvesant Ins. Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • 10 Enero 1975
    ... ... United States v. Kirkman, 426 F.2d 747, 752 (4th Cir. 1970). United States v. Lee, 170 F. 613, 614, (S.D.Ohio, 1909). People v. Pugh, 9 Cal.App.3d 241, 250, 88 Cal.Rptr. 110 (1970) ...         In assuming the position of bail, the surety enters into a contract ... Miller v. State, 158 Ala. 73, 77-78, 48 So. 360 (1909). People v. Henry, 33 App.Div.2d 1031, 308 N.Y.S.2d 245 (1970). See Reese v. United States, 76 U.S. 13, 9 Wall. 13, 21, 19 L.Ed. 541 (1869). The judge's statement ... ...
  • People v. Stuyvesant Ins. Co.
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court
    • 9 Febrero 1979
    ... ... v. Gans, 46 A.D.2d 618, 619, 359 N.Y.S.2d 803, 804 (1st Dept.1974); People v. Henry, 33 A.D.2d 1031, 1032, 308 N.Y.S.2d 245, 246 (2d Dept.1970)). This rule, simply ... stated, is that the liability of a surety may not be altered or extended beyond the express contractual obligation without the surety's consent (Becker v. Faber, 280 N.Y. 146, 148, 19 N.E.2d 997, 998 (1939); ... ...
  • Bankers Trust Hudson Valley, N.A. v. Christie
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • 15 Marzo 1979
    ... ... g., Delaware Funds v. Zuckerman-Honickman, Inc., 43 A.D.2d 889, 351 N.Y.S.2d 769; People v. Henry, 33 A.D.2d 1031, 1032, 308 N.Y.S.2d 245, 246). This rule of strict construction seeks to guard the rights of the surety and protect him ... ...
  • People v. Campbell
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • 9 Febrero 1970
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT