Case ID: mass_5/html/0405-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Curia.\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

* Wilbor Southwoth, Plaintiff in Error, versus Oliver Bradford.
    The report of referees under the statute of 1786, c. 21., must be made at the next term of the Common Pleas after it is agreed upon.
    The judgment complained of, the record of which was sent up from the Common Pleas for this county, upon the writ of error issued in this case, was rendered upon a report of referees, made under a rule acknowledged before a justice of the peace, pursuant to the statute of 1786, c. 21.
    Upon the return of the scire facias to hear errors, the defendant in error was defaulted. The general error was assigned.
    The rule was acknowledged on the third of December, 1807. On the twenty-fifth of the same month the referees agreed upon, and signed their report, which was returned to the Common Pleas at their December term, 1808, two terms having intervened since the report was agreed on.
   Curia.

The statute requires the report to be made at the next term, and in that case the Common Pleas are authorized to enter judgment. By the delay of making the report, whether through accident or design is immaterial, the rule became ipso facto discharged, the judgment was rendered without any legal authority, and it must be reversed. Vide the cases of Durell in error vs. Merrill, 1 Mass. Rep. 411., and Mott in error vs. Anthony, ante, page 489.