Haskell v. Hazard

33 Me. 585

Opinion

To these objections a reply was made by

Webster.

After observing that there was an irregularity in addressing the application for the supersedeas, not to the Court but to one of its members, although when directed to the Court, one of them had authority to act upon it; and after further observing that as one of the Court, in granting the supersedeas, had passed upon the suitableness of the bond, there was no occasion to revise his decision, the Court granted leave to amend.