Harrison County v. Rogers
Harrison County v. Rogers
Opinion of the Court
delivered the opinion of the court on the motion.
Counsel for the motion concedes that Houston v. Witherspoon, 68 Miss., 188, 190 (8 South. Rep., 515), would be conclusive against him if there was a motion to dismiss the appeal as to Jones. But he still insists that as to Harrison county no valid appeal ever was perfected by the county, because no bond was given in thirty days. But the statute (§ 93, Code 1892) expressly exempted the county from giving any bond. The county petitioned for the appeal April 5, 1904. The appeal was granted same day, expressly exempting the county from giving bond. The county had citation issued April 26, 1904, and served on appellee, and, the county having thus done all that the law required, the appeal was duly perfected.
The motion must therefore he, and it is, denied.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Harrison County v. William O. Rogers
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Motion. 1. Appeal. County. Exemption from bond. Code 1892, § 93. Demurrer overruled. Code 1892, § 33. Where a county prayed for and obtained an appeal without bond, as authorized by Code 1892, § 93, from a decree overruling its demurrer to a bill in equity, under Code 1892, § 33, authorizing an appeal from sucb a decree, if applied for and perfected within a limited time, the appeal is perfected, within the statutory time limit, where a citation in error was sued out and served within such time. 2. Same. Lapse of time. Motion to docket and dismiss. Failure of appellee to malte. An appellee who has been served with a citation in error cannot, after the transcript of the record is filed in the supreme court, complain of the lapse of time less than will bar an appeal (two years, Code 1892, § 2752), between the taking of an appeal and the filing of the transcript in the supreme court, if he failed during such time to appear and move to docket and dismiss the cause. Houston v. Witherspoon, 68 Miss., 188.