Commonwealth v. Rainey
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
ERROR to the Common Pleas of Cambria county. The Commonwealth for the use of S. and J. Moore against William Rainey, Peter M’Guire, Michael M’Guire, and John Rainey.
Read the full summary
ERROR to the Common Pleas of Cambria county. The Commonwealth for the use of S. and J. Moore against William Rainey, Peter M’Guire, Michael M’Guire, and John Rainey. This was a scire facias upon a judgment at the suit of the Commonwealth against the defendants, in which the parties stated the following facts as a special verdict: In the year 1834, William Rainey was elected High Sheriff of Cambria county, and on the 29th of November 1834, entered into a bond in the usual form, in the penal sum of $8000, with Peter M’Guire, Michael M’Guire, and John Rainey, as his sureties in said bond, which…
1Per curiam
— The Limitation in the Act of 1803, is neither altered nor supplied, and it certainly is not expressly repealed. But the legislature has changed the method of proceeding in actions on official bonds; and what then ? It follows not that there was a design to repeal the limitation in favour of sheriff’s sureties. The first judgment is cautionary for those who come afterwards, but it does not necessarily supersede the limitation which was applicable to separate actions, when every injured party sued for himself. The proviso which contained the limitation in the Act of 1803 was, “ that such suit…
2Cited by3 opinions
- McMicken v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1868
- Com., for Use v. PerrySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
- Smith v. Commonwealth ex rel. McGarvySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1868