Longstreet v. Lafitte

Citations

• 29 S.C.L. 664

Syllabus

<p>1. In an action brought on a Georgia judgment, in which the defendant was held to bail, the verdict of the jury was “ we find for the plaintiff two hundred and eleven dollars, twenty-four cents, with interest from the twenty-third of May, eighteen hundred and twenty-five,” and the judgment entered up on this verdict, eighth April, eighteen hundred and thirty-five, for the like sum and interest as found with the costs, but concluding “ which damages, costs and charges, amount in the whole to two hundred and forty dollars and seventy cents.” In debt on the bail bond, it was held that the words “ which damages, costs and charges amount in the whole,” &c., might be rejected as superfluous, so as to make the verdict and judgment correspond, and that the bail was liable to the same extent as the principal, vide Kinsler vs. Kyser, 4 McCord, 315.</p> <p>2. Interest on the canse of- action in the original suit held recoverable from the time stated in the verdict.</p> <p>3. On a ca. sa. issued against the principal in a bail bond, the sheriff returned it simply indorsed “ non est,” subscribed, but not sworn to; and after the commencement of actions against the bail, an order of court was passed that the sheriff make a return on the ca. sa. “ in conformity with the truth of the case, in due form of law.” The second return of the sheriff by order of court, was after the expiration of the term of office when non est was returned, but when the order was passed he was again in office. Held that the amended or second return was sufficient to fix the liability of the bail.</p>