Case Name: People v. Brady et al.
Court: New York Court of Common Pleas
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1889-12-02
Citations: 7 N.Y.S. 661
Docket Number: 
Parties: People v. Brady et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 7
Pages: 661–661

Head Matter:
People v. Brady et al.
(Common Pleas of New Pork, City and County, General Term.
December 2, 1889.)
Bail—Judgment on Forfeited Recognizance—Vacation.
Where the security for one accused of keeping open on Sunday a place for sale of liquor made effort to secure his due attendance, but failed, and the prisoner after-wards appeared, was convicted, and paid a' fine, the forfeited recognizance will be discharged.
Application to discharge a judgment and forfeited recognizance, in which James Brady was principal, and Oscar J. Mayer surety.
Argued before Larremore, C. J., and Daly and Van Hoesen, JJ.
John R. Fellows, Dist. Atty., for the People. Townsend, Dyett & Einstein, for defendants.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The prisoner Brady was accused of keeping open on Sunday a place duly licensed for the sale of spirituous liquors, Ho. 342 First avenue. He was admitted to bail in the sum of $100, and required to appear for trial on the 5th day of December, 1888. The security made effort to secure his attendance on that day, but was unsuccessful, and the bond was forfeited. On the 28th May, 1889, the prisoner appeared before the court, was tried, convicted, and sentenced to pay a fine, which he did pay. The application to •discharge the judgment and the forfeited recognizance should be granted.