Parker v. McGaha
Parker v. McGaha
Opinion of the Court
Previous to the act of 1820, Clay’s Dig. 308, all writs of error returnable to the supreme court were issued from this court, or from some one of the judges thereof, directed to the clerks of the circuit or county courts. Upon the service of a writ of error from this court, upon the clerk of the circuit or county court, it became his duty to comply with the mandate of the writ. The court from which it issued, or the judge, was required to take security from the party applying for the writ, that the party should prosecute his writ of error to effect, and answer all damages and costs if the party failed in his plea. It was the duty of the clerks of the circuit and county courts to make out a transcript of the records of the cause sought to be removed to the supreme court, and he could not justify himself in refusing to comply with the writ, because the plaintiff in error had not, or declined paying him for making out the transcript in advance. .
By the act of 1820, it was made the duty of the clerks of the circuit courts of this state, on the application of a party against whom a final judgment has been rendered, his agent, or attorney, to issue a writ of error, returnable to the next term of the supreme court; also, to issue citation to the opposite party, which should be served by the proper officer of the court, and which should be returned to the office of the clerk whenever served, and shall, together with a transcript of the cause, be delivered to the party applying, his agent or attorney, to be by him, or her, returned to the supreme court. This statute plainly marks out the duty of a clerk, when application is made to him for a writ of error; but it does not authorize the clerk to demand his fees in advance, before the delivery of the transcript to the party applying for it.
Before the passage of this act, there was no act that authorized the clerk to demand his fees in advance, before making out and delivering the transcript, but it was his duty
This being the law, and as the facts are agreed on, and are such as would have probably been returned to a rule to show; cause, the motion of the applicant is granted, and a mandamus is ordered to be issued.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.