Case ID: scl_14/html/0044-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Nott, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

John & G. DeBow ads. Sam’l. M’Clary & Wm. Applegate.
    The statute, of Ceorge 2, which requires two securities to a replevin bond, is not of force in this state»
    If the law did require two securities, it would be too late after judgment to, take advantage of such omission.
    This was amotion for arrest of judgment, before Judge Waties, who-.dismissed the motion; on the ground,
    That the objections made to the replevin bond came too late after judgment obtained.
    • An application was now made for a new trial, on the grounds:
    That the bond, on which this, action was founded, had but one security upon it, whereas the law requires two securities on bonds of this nature, viz. on replevin bonds.
    
      Sargent,, for the motion.
    Hunt, contra.
   Nott, J.

This court concur in opinion with the presiding judgei It may further be observed, that the statute of George the second, which requires two securities to a replev-in bond, is not of force in this state, 
      
       See City Council vs. Price, 1 M’Cord’s Rep. 299, where an intimation was made, that the 2 Geo. 2. c. 19, was of force'In practice, which by this case is decided not to he.