Ripley v. Merchatns' National Bank
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Writ op error from a judgment of the Superior Court in New London County. The only entry upon the record of bond given on the writ was in the following memorandum at the close of the writ, and above the signature of the clerk of the court:—“ Bonds for prosecution given, and George C. Ripley recognized in the sufficient sum of one hundred dollars to prosecute, &c.”
Read the full summary
Writ op error from a judgment of the Superior Court in New London County. The only entry upon the record of bond given on the writ was in the following memorandum at the close of the writ, and above the signature of the clerk of the court:—“ Bonds for prosecution given, and George C. Ripley recognized in the sufficient sum of one hundred dollars to prosecute, &c.” The provision of the statute with regard to the bonds to be given on the issuing of writs of error, is as follows :—“ And the authority signing such writ shall take good and sufficient bond, with surety, that the plaintiff in error…
1Opinion of the Court
At the opening of the court the next morning the opinion of the judges was given orally by the Chief Justice as follows:
Park, C. J.
The court hold the plea in abatement sufficient. We regard the statute as clearly requiring bond to be given, with surety, on the issuing of the writ of error. The •record states that “ bonds for prosecution were given, and George C. Ripley was recognized, &c.” This a majority of the judges take to mean that George C. Ripley alone gave bond. If the record had been simply “ bonds for prosecution given,” and no more, it would have been inferred that full and legal…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Lovejoy v. IsbellSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1898
- Morse v. RankinSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1883
- Vincent v. Mutual Reserve Fund Life Asso.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1903
- "Harris Millinery Supply" v. Harris GansConnecticut Superior Court · 1936
- Harris v. Harris & Gans Co.Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas · 1936