See Forthcoming Bonds, 3. Sheriff's Sale, 1.
See Constable, 1. Principal and Agent. Sheriff's Sale, 2.
Satisfaction, 3, 4. Trusts and Trustees, 5, 6, &c.
See Practice Superior Court, 3.
1. Where a promissory note is sued on, barred by the Stat-
ute of Limitation on its face, and the defendant pleads
the Statute, the plaintiff may, under our judicial system
and practice, amend his petition by alleging a new pro-
mise, so as to prevent the operation of the Statute.
Beard and another vs. Simmons.....
2. A declaration or answer may be amended at any time
before the case is finally submitted to the Jury, if the
principles of justice require it. Bryant vs. Hambrick.... 133
See Equity Practice, 1, 6.
1. An executor is entitled to appeal without security, when
the judgment is to affect only the assets of the decedent
in his hands; aliter, where the judgment is against him
personally, and for which he is responsible out of his
own funds. McCay vs. Devers.....
2. Where one of several parties appealing, signs the bond
with security, and the others fail, the appeal is good as to
the party signing, under the Act of 1839. Weeks and
Wife vs. Sego...
3. An appeal under the Act of 1837, incorporating the Ir-
winton Bridge Company, carries nothing but the ques-
tion of damages. Harrisons vs. Young...
4. Where the law guaranties to parties the right of appeal,
and no time prescribed within which it shall be entered,
it must be done within four days from the date of the de-
cision complained of—that being a reasonable time, ac-
cording to the general law regulating appeals. The
State vs. Dean.......
5. An appeal must be entered by the appellant in person,
or by his attorney at law or in fact, duly authorized by
warrant for that purpose. The Com. of Roads, &c. 580th
Dis. vs. The Griffin, &c. P. R. Co........
6. May an attorney at law, who appears on the first trial,
enter an appeal without special authority? And is it his
duty to do so? Quere. Ibid.
See Claim, 3. Practice Supr. Court, 5.
1. It appearing from the statement in the face of the indict-
ment, that the Grand Jury were sworn, it is not compe-
tent, on a motion in arrest, to disprove the recital by ali-
unde testimony. Terrell vs. The State......
1. Land cannot be levied on and sold under an order of
the Magistrates, on attachments returnable to Justices'
Courts. It must be by virtue of an execution issuing
upon the judgment in attachment. Rogers vs. McDill &
Campbell.......
2. An attachment sued out by an attorney, on the ground
that "he was informed and believed" that the debtor re-
sided out of the State: held insufficient. Deupree vs. Ei-
senach
1. Bail is usually absolute in the first instance; still, if the
Magistrate has been deceived, or taken insufficient bail,
he may require fresh security. To entitle the sureties in
the second bond to their discharge, they must aver in
their plea, that the first bond was good and sufficient.
And quere, whether this would be a good plea? Spicer
vs. The State.......
2. A recital in the judgment of forfeiture, that the princi-
pal and bail were called and did not appear, in terms of
their undertaking, is sufficient.
3. The judgment need not specify the amount of the bond.
Ibid.
4. Where the affidavit to procure bail, stated that the plain-
tiff claimed a certain sum to be due him from the defend-
ant, held a substantial compliance with the 13th section
of the Judiciary Act of 1799. Davidson et al. vs. Carter
& Ritch......
See Bond, 3. Practice Superior Court, 11.
1. A certificate of bankruptcy may be attacked and open-
ed in a State Court, when it impedes or conflicts with
the rights of a party litigating there, so far as that par-
ty's rights are concerned. Bond vs. Baldwin......
2. Upon the trial of a claim, upon an issue between the
claimant and the plaintiff in execution, upon the ques-
tion of fraud in procuring a discharge in the Bankrupt
Court by the defendant in fi. fa. the mercantile books
of a firm of which the defendant in fi. fa. was a mem-
ber, before his application, are admissible to show that
he was the owner of an interest in that firm not returned
in his schedule. Ibid.
3. All the acquisitions of a bankrupt made after the filing
his petition in bankruptcy, are exempt from liability to
pay debts previously contracted. Ibid.
1. It is no plea for a surety, that a bond was obtained by
duress. Spicer vs. The State.......
2. An instrument under the hand and seal of the party ex-
ecuting it, imports a consideration in law, and a demurrer
to the admissibility of such an instrument in evidence,
for want of consideration, will be overruled. Rutherford
vs. The Ex. Com. Bapt. Conv. &c...
3. When the names of the sureties to a bail bond are in-
serted in the obligatory part of the bond, but omitted in
the condition: Held, that such omission did not alter the
legal effect of the instrument. Davidson et al. vs. Carter
& Ritch........
See Adm'rs, Er'rs, &c. 3. Failure of Consideration, 1.
Forthcoming Bond. Sheriff, 2, 3, 4, 6.
See Damages, 1, 2. Evidence, 8.
1. Where the Court is requested by counsel to charge on
points of law, which bear upon the case, it is the duty of
the Court to charge on the points. Galt vs. Jackson..... 151
2. A charge upon an assumed state of facts, not proved
before the Jury, is erroneous. Harrison vs. Thompson... 310
3. The question of adverse possession is for the decision
of the Jury and not the Court. Beverly and another vs.
Burke.....
4. For the presiding Judge to charge the Jury, that the
plaintiff's possession is "uninterrupted, continuous, notori-
ous, sufficient and adverse," is error, and for which, under
the Act of 1849-'50, a new trial must be granted. Ibid.
See New Trial, 10.
1. The Claim Laws are cumulative, permissive, not man-
datory. Whittington vs. Doe ex dem. Wright.....
2. A surety on a claim bond, against whom judgment for
damages and costs has been given, together with the
claimant, and who has paid off the 'fi. fa. is entitled,
under our Statute, to control the same for the purpose of
reimbursing himself out of his principal. Keith vs.
Whelchel......
3. When the Petit Jury in a claim case have returned a
verdict giving damages against the claimant, and the ver-
dict is appealed from, and pending the appeal the claim
is withdrawn: Held, that the case goes on as to the ques-
tion of damages, and stands for trial as before, and no
execution can issue for the damages until the appeal is
disposed of. Strickland vs. Maddox et al...........
See Bankruptcy, 2. Fraud 1. Practice Supr. Court, 4.
See Evidence, 9. Lim. of Actions, 12, &c.
|