{
  "id": 1884411,
  "name": "Jones vs. The State",
  "name_abbreviation": "Jones v. State",
  "decision_date": "1873-06",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "119",
  "last_page": "120",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "28 Ark. 119"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark.",
    "id": 8808,
    "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 184,
    "char_count": 2234,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.444,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 9.220886982734607e-08,
      "percentile": 0.5102044559354618
    },
    "sha256": "c93ec2645bb0c3ce2f2fd4eba4a6982370c73eb3ced21a38e508641fe795650f",
    "simhash": "1:14efe865ac06538b",
    "word_count": 387
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:36:32.641930+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Jones vs. The State."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "McClure, C. J.\nThe only question arising in this case is, whether the surety on a bail bond is released from all liability therefrom, by a discharge in bankruptcy.\nOn the 21st of August, 1867, O. E. Jones, the appellant, R. P. Ware and R. D. D. Miller, entered into bond to the state of Arkansas, that one Rickard Q. Jones would bo and appear before and at the circuit court of Arkansas county, on the first day of its next term, to answer to an indictment for forgery, and not depart the court without leave. Richard Q. Jones did not appear in accordance with the conditions of said bond\u00bb and scire facias issued, which was served on Oswell F. Jones, R. D. D. Miller and Robert P. Ware, and. Richard Q. Jones was not found.\nAt the November term, the attorney for the state moved for judgment and execution on the bond, which motion was overruled.\nAt the May term, Oswell F. Jones pleaded a discharge in bankruptcy, to which the state demurred, on the ground that the plea is insufficient in law. The demurrer was sustained, and Jones appealed to this court.\nA discharge in bankruptcy releases the person therein named \u201cfrom all debts, claims, liabilities and demands which were, or might have been proved against his estate.\u201d (Sec. 34.) This language is broad and comprehensive enough to include the liability sought -to be enforced against the appellant. The bond, which Jones became a surety on, was not a \u201c debt created by fraud, or embezzlement of the bankrupt, or by his defalcation as a public officer, or while acting in a fiduciary character,\u201d and not being so, it is not included in the exceptions named in the act.\nThe court below erred in rendering judgment against the appellant, and in sustaining the demurrer. For the errors aforesaid, the judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded with instructions to set aside the judgment as to Jones.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "McClure, C. J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Watkins & Rose, for appellant.",
      "J. R. Montgomery, Attorney General, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Jones vs. The State.\nBaukrctptcy : To what, disaha/rge in, may he pleaded,.\nTo scire facias against surety on bail bond, the defendant pleaded liis discharge in bankruptcy. On demurrer to plea, held, that the plea was good.\nAPPEAL from Arkansas Circuit Court.\nHon. Henry B. Morse, Circuit Judge.\nWatkins & Rose, for appellant.\nJ. R. Montgomery, Attorney General, for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0119-01",
  "first_page_order": 135,
  "last_page_order": 136
}