Carbaugh v. Sanders

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Carbaugh v. Sanders

13 Pa. Super. 361, 1900 Pa. Super. LEXIS 160

CourtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedApril 23, 1900

DocketAppeal, No. 25

StatusPublished

Cited by13 cases

This text of 13 Pa. Super. 361 (Carbaugh v. Sanders) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Carbaugh v. Sanders, 13 Pa. Super. 361, 1900 Pa. Super. LEXIS 160 (Pa. Ct. App. 1900).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam,

The defendant was not misled by any act or declaration of the justice. The latter demanded all the costs, as it was not only his right but his duty to do under the Act of June 24, 1885, P. L. 159, but the defendant through his counsel insisted that he was only compelled to jjay the justice’s and constable’s costs. A direction contained in a statute, though couched in merely premissive language, will not be construed as leaving compliance optional, where the good sense of the entire enactment requires its provisions to be deemed compulsory. The intent is to be judged of by the purposes of the statute. The manifest purpose of this statute was to secure prompt payment of the costs, not only of the justice, but of the constable and [363]*363party; it is therefore not to be supposed that the legislature intended to leave compliance with its provisions optional with the-justice. See Endlich on Interpretation of Statutes, secs. 307. 312, and cases cited in note b of sec. 307. It was his duty to-demand the costs and the defendant’s duty to pay them upon being informed as to the amount. The omission of the defendant to comply with this prerequisite to an appeal was without-legal excuse, therefore, the court committed no error in striking-off the appeal.

As to the other reason assigned for striking off the appeal, we-remark that the proper practice would have been to rule the-appellant to perfect his recognizance: Kerr v. Martin, 122 Pa. 436.

The judgment is affirmed and the appeal dismissed at the-costs of the appellant.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam,

The defendant was not misled by any act or declaration of the justice. The latter demanded all the costs, as it was not only his right but his duty to do under the Act of June 24, 1885, P. L. 159, but the defendant through his counsel insisted that he was only compelled to jjay the justice’s and constable’s costs. A direction contained in a statute, though couched in merely premissive language, will not be construed as leaving compliance optional, where the good sense of the entire enactment requires its provisions to be deemed compulsory. The intent is to be judged of by the purposes of the statute. The manifest purpose of this statute was to secure prompt payment of the costs, not only of the justice, but of the constable and [363]*363party; it is therefore not to be supposed that the legislature intended to leave compliance with its provisions optional with the-justice. See Endlich on Interpretation of Statutes, secs. 307. 312, and cases cited in note b of sec. 307. It was his duty to-demand the costs and the defendant’s duty to pay them upon being informed as to the amount. The omission of the defendant to comply with this prerequisite to an appeal was without-legal excuse, therefore, the court committed no error in striking-off the appeal.

As to the other reason assigned for striking off the appeal, we-remark that the proper practice would have been to rule the-appellant to perfect his recognizance: Kerr v. Martin, 122 Pa. 436.

The judgment is affirmed and the appeal dismissed at the-costs of the appellant.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

13 Pa. Super. 361, 1900 Pa. Super. LEXIS 160, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carbaugh-v-sanders-pasuperct-1900.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack