Paxton v. Lively
Oregon Supreme Court
Appeal from Wallowa County. Statement by Mr. Justice Hailey. O. F. Paxton recovered judgment against L. D. Lively, wbo appealed to this court and filed his transcript, on appeal herein, whereupon plaintiff filed a motion to dismiss the appeal for the reason that the defendant had failed to file a proper undertaking on appeal, in that the surety thereon was not qualified as by law required.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Wallowa County. Statement by Mr. Justice Hailey. O. F. Paxton recovered judgment against L. D. Lively, wbo appealed to this court and filed his transcript, on appeal herein, whereupon plaintiff filed a motion to dismiss the appeal for the reason that the defendant had failed to file a proper undertaking on appeal, in that the surety thereon was not qualified as by law required. The record discloses that the plaintiff excepted in the lower court to the sufficiency of the surety on the undertaking and required him to justify before the county clerk, where he testified that he then'…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Hailey
The sole question raised by this motion is whether or not a United States commissioner is qualified to act as surety >on an undertaking, on appeal under our law. Subdivision 3 of 549, B. & C. Comp., provides:
“The qualifications of sureties in the undertaking .on appeal shall be the same as in bail on arrest, and, if excepted to, they shall justify in like manner.”
Section 1507, B. & C. Comp., defining the qualifications of bail on arrest, provides:
“No counselor or attorney, sheriff, clerk of any court, or other officer of any court, is qualified to be bail.”'
In Todd v. United States, 158 U. S.…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Todd v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
3Cited by1 opinion
- Farnworth v. VietIdaho Supreme Court · 1924