Robinson v. . Bryan

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Robinson v. . Bryan

34 N.C. 183

DecidedJune 5, 1851

StatusPublished

This text of 34 N.C. 183 (Robinson v. . Bryan) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Robinson v. . Bryan, 34 N.C. 183 (N.C. 1851).

Pincite

Opinion

Ruffin, C. J.

If the motion had been made at the first term it would have been proper to allow it, unless the defendant had then offered to give ‘ a sufficient bond. McDowell v. Bradley, 8 Ire. 92. So, if the defendants were not of substance to answer the plaintiff’s recovery made and the «costs, the Court might have laid them under a rule to *184 give a proper bond, which would secure the plaintiff. There was no suggestion of that kind, but the plaintiff insisted peremptorily, that the Court- should not entertain the appeal, by reason, merely, that an appeal bond had not been duly given. Now the omission to make that motion, for two years after the case was in the Superior Court for trial, is, according to the established practice, such laches as deprives the appellee o( the right to make it at all. Wallace v. Corbit 4 Ire. 45 ; Arrington v. Smith, 4 Ire. 59.

Pee. Curiam. Judgment reversed, and a procedendo awarded.

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

Ruffin, C. J.

If the motion had been made at the first term it would have been proper to allow it, unless the defendant had then offered to give ‘ a sufficient bond. McDowell v. Bradley, 8 Ire. 92. So, if the defendants were not of substance to answer the plaintiff’s recovery made and the «costs, the Court might have laid them under a rule to *184 give a proper bond, which would secure the plaintiff. There was no suggestion of that kind, but the plaintiff insisted peremptorily, that the Court- should not entertain the appeal, by reason, merely, that an appeal bond had not been duly given. Now the omission to make that motion, for two years after the case was in the Superior Court for trial, is, according to the established practice, such laches as deprives the appellee o( the right to make it at all. Wallace v. Corbit 4 Ire. 45 ; Arrington v. Smith, 4 Ire. 59.

Pee. Curiam. Judgment reversed, and a procedendo awarded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

34 N.C. 183, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robinson-v-bryan-nc-1851.