People ex rel. Cooney v. Judges of the Common Pleas
This text of 2 How. Pr. 189 (People ex rel. Cooney v. Judges of the Common Pleas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
I am of the opinion that the filing of the bond and return to the writ of certiorari, by the justice, was sufficient evidence of his approval of the sufficiency of the sureties (2 Cow. 506). The statute (2 B. S. 256, § 172) does not require the justice to certify orfile his^approval, as it does in the case of an appeal bond. (lb. 259, § 189.) Although it is well that justices should certify their approval in all cases upon such bonds. The order, therefore, óf the common pleas, quashing the certiorari, was erroneous, [191]*191but- -it cannot be corrected by mandamus. (20 Wend. 658.) Motion to vacate the rules, allowing the writs of alternative and peremptory mandamus, and to set aside said writs, granted, but without costs to either oarty.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2 How. Pr. 189, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-cooney-v-judges-of-the-common-pleas-nysupct-1846.