skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 

NCJ Number: 158589 Find in a Library
Title: How American Commercial Bail Developed Differently From Other Common Law Countries
Journal: International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice  Volume:18  Issue:2  Dated:(Fall 1994)  Pages:265-276
Author(s): F E Devine
Date Published: 1994
Page Count: 12
Type: Historical Overview
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This article examines how the American branch of the common- law heritage came to deviate so strikingly from the rest of the common-law countries on the matter of commercial bail.
Abstract: Beginning in the second half of the 19th Century, courts principally in Ireland, England, and India began to act against payment to bail sureties, based on the belief that any indemnification of them, even partial, undermined their reliability. Irish courts considered indemnified potential sureties to be unreliable. If all potential sureties are indemnified, bail was denied. In England, courts declared agreements to indemnify sureties illegal contracts contrary to public policy, which would not be enforced by the courts. Although India accepted the refinement of this position, England proceeded to declare agreements to pay bail sureties to be criminal conspiracies. Meanwhile, in the United States, a circumscribed version of the position that indemnification contracts were against public policy -- and therefore illegal and unenforceable -- actually gained acceptance between 1870 and 1912. In 1912, however, Justice Holmes in Leary v. U.S. renounced the common law concept of bail sureties in favor of an "impersonal and wholly pecuniary" view. This terminated the anti- indemnification movement. Courts soon noted the detrimental effects of commercialism on bail. 12 references and 49 cited cases
Main Term(s): Court procedures
Index Term(s): Bail bonds; Bail reform; Bail/Financial Release
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=158589

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.