About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

1 In the Supreme Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Plaintiff in Error, vs. J. M. Kaumheimer, and Charles Schick, Defendants in Error. January Term, A. D. 1868, No. 183. Original February Session, 1865, No. 1. Quarter Sessions 1868

handle is hein.trials/adkg0001 and id is 1 raw text is: In the Supreme Court for the Eastern Distriot of Pennsylvania. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Plaintiff in Error, January Term, A. D. 1868, vs. No. 183. J. M. KAUMHEIMER, and Original February Session, CHARLES SCHiCK, 1865, No. 1. Quarter Sessions. Defendants in Error. Writ of Error to the Court of Oyer and Terminer, and Court of General Quarter Sessions of the Peace, for the City and County of Philadelphia. Exit, December 6, 1867. Returnable first Monday of January, 1868. Praecipe and Affidavit filed. Record returned, December 19, 1867. Assignment of Error filed Dec. 23, 1867. HISTORY OF THE CASE. This was an action of debt on a forfeited Recognisance, returned into said Court of Quarter Sessions conditioned for the appearance of J. M. Kaumheimer in said court, taken by Alderman James McCahen. The summons was returned served as to Charles Schick, the surety, and nihil habet, as to J. M. Kaumhei'mer. Charles Schick only being in court, the said Charles Schick put in an affidavit of defence, stating that he had become bail for J. M. Kaumheimer, the defendant, for a further hearing of his case, but did not become bail for his final appearance at court, as returned to said court by Alderman McCahen, (pro ut affidavit.) The Attorney of the prosecutor, Andrew Haustetter, acting in the name of the Commonwealth, as provided by law, sought to obtain judgment for want of sufficient affidavit of defence, but the court refused to grant it; divers pleas were filed embodying the defence set up in the affidavit, amounting as it does to the plea of nul tiel record, (see record,) to the. last of which pleas the counsel aforesaid demurred specially, and the court overruled the said demurrer, and entered judgmenifor defendant Schick, and to which judgment this Writ of Error is taken.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most