Wall v. Jarrott

• Decision Date: 31 December 1842
• Citation: 25 N.C. 42,3 Ired. 42
• Court: North Carolina Supreme Court
• Parties: WALL and HOLTON v. JARROTT ET ALs.

3 Ired. 42

25 N.C. 42

WALL and HOLTON

v.JARROTT ET ALs.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December Term, 1842.

On motion for a judgment against the sureties in the bond of a debtor, given under the insolvent debtor's law, it was objected that the christian names of the plaintiffs were not inserted in either the warrant, judgment or ca. sa. Held, that this was not a valid objection, as the imperfection was cured after judgment, by our Statute of Amendments, and the ca. sa. properly pursued the judgment, and gave the officer authority to make the arrest and take the bond.

It was objected, secondly, that the bond was not made to the plaintiffs by their christian names. This objection also overruled, because the officer literally pursued the Statute in taking the bond, and the averment of the plaintiffs' christian names in the motion, is equivalent to a similar averment in a declaration in debt on such a bond.

Appeal from the judgment of the Superior Court of Law of Richmond County, at Fall Term, 1842, his Honor Judge DICK presiding.

A warrant from a justice of the peace had been issued against the defendant, E. D. Jarrott, to answer the complaint of “Wall and Holton, in a plea of debt, &c.” Upon the trial before the magistrate, judgment was given against the defendant, (Jarrott,) for the amount claimed. Upon this judgment a ca. sa. issued. Neither the judgment nor ca. sa. mentioned the christian names of the plaintiffs. The officer took a bond from Jarrott, under the provisions of the insolvent debtors' act, for his appearance at the County Court, &c. which bond was payable to “Wall and Holton.” The bond was signed by Jarrott and E. Love, the present defendants. From the judgment of the County Court in this case, the defendants appealed to the Superior Court. The cause coming on in the Superior Court, the following judgment was entered: “The warrant, the judgment therein, the writ of capias ad satisfaciendum, and the ca. sa. bond taken pursuant thereto, being produced and proved with the transcript of the record from the Court of Pleas and Quarter Sessions filed in this case, the plaintiffs, Stephen Wall and John B. Holton, partners in trade, trading under the name and style of Wall and Holton, moved to have proclamation made, and the defendant, Edward Jarrott, called preparatory to the trial of the issue made in this cause, which motion being granted and proclamation made at the door of the Court house, and the said Edward D. Jarrott being solemnly called three times, to make his personal appearance and having failed to appear, and proclamation having been made, and Erasmus Love, the other defendant, being called and required to produce the body of the said Edward D. Jarrott, and the said Edward not appearing, the plaintiffs moved to have judgment rendered for the...