McCall v. Moss, 100 Ill. 461 (1881)

March 1881 · Illinois Supreme Court

100 Ill. 461

Louisa McCall v. William S. Moss.

At Ottawa, March Term, 1881.

Appeal bond-—liability thereon—sufficiency as to amount. A decree was rendered in the trial court for $36,000. On an appeal to the Appellate Court an appeal bond was given in the sum of $40,000. The decree was affirmed on that appeal, and on a further appeal" to the Supreme Court an appeal bond in the sum of only $300 was given. On the question whether the latter bond was for a sufficient amount, it was considered that in case of an affirmance by this court of the judgment of t¡he Appellate Court, the appeal bond given on the appeal from the trial court would stand as security for the decree rendered in that court, and as the appeal bond given on the appeal to the Supreme Court was sufficient in amount to cover the costs in this court, that was all that was required.

Appeal from the Appellate Court for the Second District.

At the March term of this court the appellee entered his motion for a rule upon the appellant to give an additional appeal bond in a larger sum. At the present term the appellant moves to discharge the rule entered under the prior motion.

Mr. H. B. Hopkins, for the appellant.

Mr. David McCulloch, and Mr. John Muckle, for the appellee.

Sheldon, J.:

This is a motion to discharge a rule to give an additional appeal bond in a larger sum. It is an appeal from the Appellate Court. The circuit court rendered a decree for $36,000. An appeal was taken to the Appellate Court, and the circuit court' required a bond of $40,000. That bond was given. The Appellate Court affirmed the decree. On appeal from the Appellate Court to this court an appeal bond of $300 vfas required. If given, that bond would be sufficient to cover costs in this court, in case we affirmed the judgment of the Appellate Court, and we' understand that this bond for $40,000, given in the circuit court on the appeal to the Appellate Court, would stand as security for the payment of the decree. If so, we think the bond is sufficient in amount. No exception is taken to the sufficiency of the sureties,—it is only as to the amount of the bond.

The rule will be discharged.

Rule discharged,