State v. . Brown

Supreme Court of North Carolina
State v. . Brown, 11 S.E.2d 294 (N.C. 1940)
218 N.C. 368; 1940 N.C. LEXIS 157
BaRNHill

State v. . Brown

Opinion of the Court

BaRNHill, J.

The appellant contends that it was error for the court to enter judgment absolute on the sci. fa. until such sci. fa. had been served on the principal and that, therefore, the judgment pronounced is voidable and unenforceable. The question thus sought to be presented is decided by this Court in Bond Co. v. Krider, ante, 361. The decision in that case is controlling. As the defendant Brown was permitted t0‘ remain at large under the bond until the second Monday of the court, his failure to appear constitutes a forfeiture thereof. S. v. Staley, 200 N. C., 385, 157 S. E., 25.

Affirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name
State v. Wadis Brown and Surety, Tar Heel Bond Company, Inc.
Cited By
6 cases
Status
Published