Skip to main content
· 6/19/1893

Zuckerman v. Hawes

Citations

  • 146 Ill. 59
  • 34 N.E. 479

Syllabus

<p>1. Appellate Court—jurisdiction and presumption in favor of its acts. The Appellate Court is a court of superior jurisdiction in the technical sense of that term, and its orders and judgments must be held to be supported by the presumptions which ordinarily prevail in support of the judicial acts of courts of that class.</p> <p>2. Appeal bond—;justifying security. A party, under a rule in the Appellate Court, was required to file a new appeal bond in the penal sum of $3000, and on the day the rule expired produced his bond in the sum of $5000, and called his surety to justify, who testified that he was worth more than $100,000; that he owned certain real estate,—one parcel worth $75,000 encumbered for $13,000, and another worth $12,000 encumbered for $3000, and that he owned other real estate but that it was all encumbered. The court refused to approve the security and to give the party further time in which to get another surety: Held, that the surety offered was sufficient and should have been accepted, and also that it was error to refuse further time to get other surety.</p> <p>3. Same—approval of surety. An appellant should not be required to furnish security which, in any and every event and under all possible circumstances, will certainly produce the amount of the bond without requiring any further outlay on the part of the appellee. To require security of that character in all cases would be highly oppressive, and would often be tantamount to a denial of the right to appeal. A reasonable discretion should be exercised in passing upon the sufficiency of the surety, and one should be required of such pecuniary ability as will, in all reasonable probability, enable the appellee to collect his bond.</p> <p>4. Same—further time to procure surety in place of one refused. Where a party, in obedience to a rule upon him to give a new appeal bond by a day named, on such day, in good faith, presents his bond with a person as surety, believing him perfectly good, and

Judges: Bailey

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.