Plotnicki v. Nowicki

127 N.E. 564, 73 Ind. App. 383, 1920 Ind. App. LEXIS 129
CourtIndiana Court of Appeals
DecidedJune 2, 1920
DocketNo. 10,701
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 127 N.E. 564 (Plotnicki v. Nowicki) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Plotnicki v. Nowicki, 127 N.E. 564, 73 Ind. App. 383, 1920 Ind. App. LEXIS 129 (Ind. Ct. App. 1920).

Opinion

McMahan, C. J.

1. In order to effectuate a term-time appeal under §679 Burns 1914, §638 R. S. 1881, it is essential that the trial court shall, during the term at which the judgment is rendered, or during the term at which the motion for a new trial is overruled, when such motion is filed after judgment, fix the amount of the appeal bond, name and approve the surety and, if the bond is not filed during that tefm, must designate the time within which it may be filed. Where this is done the duty of the court with reference thereto is at an end. If an appellant files his bond in conformity with the statute and such order, he may prosecute his appeal as a term-time appeal, otherwise not.

2. When the trial court during term approves an appeal bond and designates the time within which it may be filed, it has no authority, at a subsequent term, although it is within the time allowed for filing such bond, to permit a substitution of another surety and to then approve such bond, as was done in [385]*385the instant case. Michigan, etc., Ins. Co. v. Frankel (1898), 151 Ind. 534, 50 N. E. 304; Brown v. Brown (1907), 168 Ind. 654, 80 N. E. 535; Daugherty v. Payne (1911), 175 Ind. 603, 95 N. E. 233; Penn, etc., Plate Glass Co. v. Poling (1913), 52 Ind. App. 492, 100 N. E. 83; Ashley v. Henderson (1904), 32 Ind. App. 242, 69 N. E. 469; Fort v. White (1915), 58 Ind. App. 524, 108 N. E. 27; Blose v. Myers (1915), 58 Ind. App. 34, 107 N. E. 548; Rohrbaugh v. Leas, Admr. (1917), 63 Ind. App. 544, 114 N. E. 762; Equitable Surety Co. v. Taylor (1919), 71 Ind. App. 382, 121 N. E. 283.

No attempt having been made to perfect a vacation appeal, appellee’s motion to dismiss must be sustained. Appeal dismissed.

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

Related

Vancleave v. Wolf
190 N.E. 371 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1934)
Lovett v. Citizens Trust & Savings Bank
165 N.E. 545 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1929)
Cole v. Bailey
87 Ind. App. 691 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1928)
Maune v. Miller & Co.
130 N.E. 879 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1921)
Montgomery v. Montgomery
129 N.E. 864 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1921)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
127 N.E. 564, 73 Ind. App. 383, 1920 Ind. App. LEXIS 129, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/plotnicki-v-nowicki-indctapp-1920.