State ex rel. Lanham v. Harmon

Citations

• 15 W. Va. 115
• 1879 W. Va. LEXIS 19

Syllabus

<p>1. Under the provisions of the 106th section of chapter 226 of the Acts A 1 of the Legislature of the State of West Virginia the following was filed with the justice, viz :</p> <p>“Know all men by these presents, That we, George Harmon, principal, and Thomas P. Carpenter and R. N. Lilly, his sureties, are held and firmly bound unto the State of West Virginia in the just and full sum of $300.00, to the payment whereof well and truly to be made we jointly and severally bind ourselves, our heirs and personal representatives, firmly by these presents, as witness our hands and seals this 24th day of May, 1876.</p> <p>' ‘ The condition of the above obligation is such, that whereas John W. Lanham has sued out before Joshua S. Morris, a justice of Putnam county, WestVa., a writ oí fieri facias against the goods and chattels of Elihu Harmon, which writ has been placed in the hands of Jas. M. Harrison, a constable of said county, who has levied the same upon one horse and a yoke of oxen as the property of the said Elihu Harmon, which property is claimed by the said George Harmon: Now, if the said George Harmon will prove in any suit brought upon this bond within three months after the date hereof that he is the owner of said property so levied upon as aforesaid, or if he fail to do so, if he, the said George Harmon, will pay the value thereof, then this obligation is to be null and void, else to remain in full force.</p> <p>his</p> <p>“Geoege Haemon. [Seal.]</p> <p>mark.</p> <p>“Thomas P. Caepenteb. [Seal.]</p> <p>“R. N. Lmii. , [Seal.]</p> <p>“Teste: A. J. Lotd, as to Harmon.”</p> <p>Upon this a declaration in assumpsit in the name of the State of West Virginia fortlie_benefit of John W. [Lanham is filed against the obligors in. ■which the said bondis set out atlarge. The defendants demurred to the declaration, and the plaintiff joined therein, and the court below overruled the demurrer. Held by the Appellate Court:</p> <p>1. That the court below erred in overruling the s