Legal Opinion

Ex parte Sweeney

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided March 31, 1892No. 16,524PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

By the Court.

The petition of the clerk asks us to decide whether the filing of a bond is essential to the effectiveness of an appeal in term. We adjudge that the filing of a bond is an essential step in perfecting a term appeal, and that where a bond is not filed within the time limited by the order granting the appeal, the appeal must be upon notice. This doctrine has been asserted in many unreported decisions, made upon motions, and is declared in Holloran v. Midland R. W. Co., 129 Ind. 274. See, also, 2 Works Pr. Sec. 1090; June v. Payne, 107 Ind. 307; Goodwin v. Fox, 120 U. S. 775; Webber…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Holloran v. Midland Railway Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1891
  2. Jones v. DronebergerIndiana Supreme Court · 1864
  3. Burt v. HœttingerIndiana Supreme Court · 1867
  4. Ham v. GreveIndiana Supreme Court · 1873
  5. June v. PayneIndiana Supreme Court · 1886

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Thompson v. Connecticut Mutual Life InsuranceIndiana Supreme Court · 1894
  2. Ex Parte BrownIndiana Supreme Court · 1906
  3. Lovett v. Citizens Trust & Savings BankIndiana Supreme Court · 1929
  4. Cincinnati, Hamilton & Dayton Railway Co. v. AcreaIndiana Court of Appeals · 1907
  5. Small v. KennedyIndiana Court of Appeals · 1895

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API