Woods v. Wiman

• Decision Date: 02 December 1890
• Citation: 25 N.E. 919,122 N.Y. 445
• Parties: WOODS v. WIMAN.
• Court: New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals

122 N.Y. 445

25 N.E. 919

WOODS

v.WIMAN.

Court of Appeals of New York, Second Division.

Dec. 2, 1890.

Appeal from a judgment of the general term of the second judicial department, affirming a judgment dismissing the complaint and entered on a nonsuit. When the bill which became chapter 672 of the Laws of 1886, relating to imprisonment, for debt, was pending in the legislature, Mr. Edward P. Wilder, a lawyer, published a pamphlet in opposition to its passage. Mr. Gilbert R. Hawes, a lawyer, was retained by the debtors imprisoned in Ludlow-Street jail to advocate the passage of the measure, and, to advance this purpose, one McDonald, then imprisoned in that jail on an execution against his person, took from his fellow-prisoners statements of the causes and circumstances of their confinement, which he reduced to writing, and delivered to Mr. Hawes. A few copies of these statements were printed in pamphlet bearing this title: ‘Prisoners now in Ludlow-Street jail. A true statement of the facts in each case where a party has been imprisoned for debt. In answer to the pamphlet issued by E. P. Wilder.’ The pamphlet contained the following, among other, statements: ‘In re Terrence Monett. About nine years ago sued on breach of promise to marry, which he never made. An open secret that plaintiff had similar relations for money with five or six others; but, being married men, their evidence unattainable at trial. Sympathy for her sex. Awarded $6,000 damages. His interest sold by sheriff at sale, and bought by plaintiff for $5,500. The matter then slept for eight years, when an attorney, a friend of plaintiff, dug it up. Both plaintiff and defendant had always lived in Brooklyn, and still so in December, 1884, and the suit and judgment had in Brooklyn court. Instead of issuing execution against him where they both lived, and where the court was that granted judgment, they had him decoyed from Brooklyn to New York, whither they had brought over the execution against the person, thus cutting off from bail in place of domicile; further embarrassing, as New York sheriff requires bondsmen within his limits. Also saved plaintiff expense of support in Brooklyn jail, and, to increase disadvantages of defendant, omitted to credit him, on judgment, with $5,500, bid for his interest in property at sheriff's sale by plaintiff eight years before, so he was thus arrested on full amount, $6,000 of judgment. Thus debarred from ability to give bail. Has been eighteen months in jail. On trying to go out under fourteen day act, could not produce written vouchers for expenditure of a few hundred dollars eight or nine years ago; so judge said oral evidence was not sufficient, and denied application. His...