Roush v. Van Hagen
ROUSH v. VAN HAGEN
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Joseph G. Baldwin (author)
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion — Baldwin
Baldwin, J. delivered the opinion of the Court Cope, J. concurring.
The appeal must be dismissed. The true construction is that the sureties must justify before a County Judge—when that is the officer selected—of the county in which the suit is. Any other construction, if. it did not render the main provisions of the statute practically inoperative, would lead to very onerous and embarrassing results. We think the natural construction of the language of the three hundred and fifty-fifth section of the Practice Act leads to this conclusion.
Ordered accordingly.
Cited by
- Tevis v. O'Connell · 1863-07-01