Case ID: mich_38/html/0312-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

William Lichfelt v. George Kopp and John Koch.
    
      Return to a capias.
    
    The following return to a capias ad satisfaciendum is sufficient under Comp. L., § 5763: “I hereby certify and return that after diligent search and inquiry I am unable to find the within named defendant Jacob Bettinger within my bailiwick and cannot have his body as I am within commanded.”
    Case made after judgment from the Superior court of Detroit.
    Submitted and decided January 30.
    
      Hickey & Flinn and E. F. Conely for plaintiff.
    
      
      O. Kirchner for defendant Koch.
   Per Curiam.

Suit upon a recognizance of special bail, by which the defendants undertook for the appearance of one Bettinger. The plaintiff obtained judgment against Bettinger, took out a fi. fa. and afterwards a ca. sa. and the only question arising upon the record is made upon the sufficiency of the sheriff’s return to the last named writ.

. The statute (Comp. L., § 5763) provides that no action shall be brought against the special bail until a ca. sa. shall be issued etc., and returned by the sheriff “that the defendant could not be found within his county.” The return made by the sheriff is that “ I hereby certify and return that after diligent search and inquiry I am unable to find the within named defendant Jacob Bettinger within my bailiwick, and cannot have his body as I am within commanded.” This is fully equivalent to the statutory requirement, and is sufficient.