clear space clear space clear space white space
A
 r c h i v e s   o f   M a r y l a n d   O n l i n e

PLEASE NOTE: The searchable text below was computer generated and may contain typographical errors. Numerical typos are particularly troubling. Click “View pdf” to see the original document.

  Maryland State Archives | Index | Help | Search
search for:
clear space
white space
Brantly's annotated Bland's Reports, Chancery Court 1809-1832
Volume 198, Page 1   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space

CASES DECIDED

IN THE

HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY

O F

MARYLAND.

*RINGGOLD'S CASE. 5
APPEAL BONDS.—RIGHT OF APPEAL IN EQUITY.

The sureties on an appeal bond adjudged, on a petition against their accept-
ance, to be sufficient and the bond approved, (a)

In what cases and to what amount an appeal bond may be required, and
how such bonds are examined, and rejected or approved.

The right of appeal at law and in equity and the control of the inferior
Court over such right discussed, (b)

No appeal lies from a decree made by consent of the appellant, (e)

(a) Rev. Code, Art. 71. sees. 61. 62, provides that no execution upon any
decree shall be stayed unless the person against whom, such decree shall he
passed. &c., shall, immediately upon praying an appeal, enter into bond
with sufficient securities in at least double the sum recovered, &c. The
clerk or Judge of the Court shall approve the bond, but no bond shall be ap-
proved nor execution stayed unless there be an affidavit that the appeal is
not taken for delay. Sees. 64 and 65 of the above article provide for the
determination of the sufficiency of the boad. See Rule 43 of the Supreme
Bench of Baltimore City. In Barnum v. Raborg. 2 Md. Ch. 516, it was
held that the only question, in cases where an appeal bond is objected to, is
to ascertain whether the party who is successful in the inferior Court has,
in the sureties in the bond, a secure indemnity for the injury he may sus-
tain by the appeal, and whether this appears by looking to the value of each
surety or by an aggregation of the worth of all is not material. The power
of Courts of Chancery in Maryland to take appeal bonds, without any
statutory enactment, has never been doubted. Fullerton v. Miller, 22 Md. 1.

(b) From what orders, &c.. in equity an appeal will lie, see Snowden v.
Dorsey, 6 H. & J. 114, note; Thompson v. McKim. Ibid, 302; Hagthorp v.
Hook. 1 G. & J. 270.

(c) So held in Williams v. Williams, 1 Gil!, 303; Gable v. Williams, 59 Md.
46. But see Bank v. McClellan, 1 Md. Ch. 329, contra, citing case in text.

1 B.

 

clear space
clear space
white space

Please view image to verify text. To report an error, please contact us.
Brantly's annotated Bland's Reports, Chancery Court 1809-1832
Volume 198, Page 1   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>


This web site is presented for reference purposes under the doctrine of fair use. When this material is used, in whole or in part, proper citation and credit must be attributed to the Maryland State Archives. PLEASE NOTE: The site may contain material from other sources which may be under copyright. Rights assessment, and full originating source citation, is the responsibility of the user.


Tell Us What You Think About the Maryland State Archives Website!



An Archives of Maryland electronic publication.
For information contact mdlegal@mdarchives.state.md.us.

©Copyright  October 06, 2023
Maryland State Archives