Ex parte Chryslin
New York Supreme Court
Hickok & Hamilton sued Chryslin before a Justice of the Peace of the county of Onondaga, and recovered judgment against him for $34 99 damages and costs, from which the defendant appealed to the next Court of Common Pleas of .that county, gave the proper notice, paid the costs, and gave a bond with a surety approved by the Justice, payable to the plaintiffs, with a penalty of $70, conditioned, after recithrg the judgment and that the defendant had appealed, thus: “ that if…
Read the full summary
Hickok & Hamilton sued Chryslin before a Justice of the Peace of the county of Onondaga, and recovered judgment against him for $34 99 damages and costs, from which the defendant appealed to the next Court of Common Pleas of .that county, gave the proper notice, paid the costs, and gave a bond with a surety approved by the Justice, payable to the plaintiffs, with a penalty of $70, conditioned, after recithrg the judgment and that the defendant had appealed, thus: “ that if the above bounden Jacob Chryslin shall prosecute the said appeal with all due diligence, to a decision in the Court of…
1Per curiam
The bond was defective. The clause relative -to paying the judgment below, with interest, and costs of the appeal, &c. was omitted, which is a material part of the condition required by :the.statute.(a) This being so, the act is peremptory that the appeal, shall not be received.' It had no force or effect whatever. (Sess. 47, ch. 238, s. 36.) The Court had no discretion. It seems to be the intention of the legislature that the party shall not be heard on appeal, unless he comply .strictly with the terms of tire act. The Court below acquired no jurisdiction of .the appeal. There is no cause…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Dore v. CoveyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1859
- Kissam v. MarshallNew York Supreme Court · 1860
- Beebe v. YoungMichigan Supreme Court · 1865
- Clark v. MilesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1850
- Cuddelback v. ParksSupreme Court of Iowa · 1849