State ex rel. Baldwin v. Seavey

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Stiles, J.

The appeal initiated by notice in open court June 10th was not perfected by the filing of a bond, and a *563new notice of appeal was given June 17th, and a bond filed on the same day. This entitled the appellant to have his case heard. Tacoma Lumber & Mfg. Co. v. Wolff, 5 Wash. 264 (31 Pac. Rep. 753).

The bond was a bond for costs and to stay proceedings, and although it was in the amount fixed by the court for a supersedeas, and no separate bond for costs was given, it was sufficient. Ewing v. Van Wagenen, 6 Wash. 39 (32 Pac. Rep. 1009).

It is…