Legal Opinion

Speight v. . Wooten

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided June 5, 1832PublishedCited by 1 opinion

The plaintiff had recovered a judgment in the Comity Court of Wayne, against one Slancil, upon which a ca. sa. issued. The defendant, under the act of 1822 (Rev. £. 1131,) became the surety of Standi for his appearance at’the County Court, for the purpose of taking the insolvent debtor’s oath. Standi made default, and a judgment was rendered on the bond against him and the defendant, for the amount of the debt.

Read the full summary

The plaintiff had recovered a judgment in the Comity Court of Wayne, against one Slancil, upon which a ca. sa. issued. The defendant, under the act of 1822 (Rev. £. 1131,) became the surety of Standi for his appearance at’the County Court, for the purpose of taking the insolvent debtor’s oath. Standi made default, and a judgment was rendered on the bond against him and the defendant, for the amount of the debt. Afterwards the defendant sued out writs of supersedeas and certiorari, and stated in his affidavit to procure them, that after the execution of the bond, and before the return day of…

1Opinion of the Court

Ruffin, Judge.

The counsel for the defendants pro-» perly yield, that the judgment of the County Court was right, and that the sickness of the surety was no sufficient ground for relief against that judgment. He hound himself for the appearance of the principal debtor. It is indeed his privilege to compel that appearance, if not voluntarily made. But that is between him and his principal ; and if he cannot, either by reason of his own illness, or the absconding or other fraud of the principal, the surety must submit to pay the debt.

It is however objected, that there was error in the Superior…

2Cited by1 opinion

  1. Fox v. . SteeleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1814

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API