Contracts · MBE-tested
Tenny v. Densley & Burford
1 D.C. 3141 Cranch 314·United States District Court for the District of Columbia·1806
(Duckett, J., absent.)
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Tenny v. Densley & Burford.
An insolvent debtor will be discharged from arrest for costs accrued partly before and partly after his discharge under the act.
[MAJORITY]
Ca. sa. for costs on verdict at December term, 1805, for defendant, Tenny. On the 30th of September, 1805, Densley had been .discharged under the Insolvent Law of 1803, [2 Stat. at Large, 237,] by the 10th section of which, he is to- be discharged if taken on any process or any judgment for any debt, damages, or costs contracted, owing or growing due before his discharge. Part of these costs were growing due or were contracted before his discharge. The defendant, Densley, was discharged by the Coukt on that ground.
(Duckett, J., absent.)