Case ID: la-ann_5/html/0179-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Eustis, C. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

J. W. Wood et al. v. Tucker Wall et al.
    Where three married women were appellants, and the appeal bond is signed only by the husband of one of them as principal, the appeal will be dismissed upon motion.
    APPEAL from the District Court of East Feliciana, Stirling, J.
    
      Roberts and Z. S. Lyons, for plaintiffs.
    
      E. T. Merrick, for defendants,
    contended: In this case there is a motion to dismiss the appeal. The plaintiffs in the action are three married women. The husband of one of them, in his name only, has signed the appeal bond. It is contended by the curator ad hoc, that the bond is insufficient, inasmuch as a married woman cannot bind herself except by her own act and with the authorisation of her husband. Here the husband of one of the plaintiff’s, in his own name, gives the bond. Neither his wife nor the wives of his co-plaintiffs are in any manner parties to it, or bound by it. In 12 R. R. 205, the court says that the names of the appellants must appear in the appeal bond, particularly in a case on appeal by motion in open court, because it must appear that all parties are concurred in the appeal. The reason is much stronger in the present case, because the hushand by his own act cannot bind his wife, neither can she bind herself alone; it requires their joint act; and the condition on which an appeal is granted, is that the appellant shall give- his obligation with a good and solvent surety. C. P. 575.
    The surety is to bind himself for the appellants, and not for the husband of one of them, as in this case. See the case of Sauletv. Trepagnier, 2d Ann. 428.
   The judgment of the court was pronounced by

Eustis, C. J.

A motion has Been made to dismiss this appeal, on the ground that the three plaintiffs are all married women, and none of them have signed the appeal bond. The order granting the appeal required the appellants should give bond with good security, &c. The bond purports to be given by one of the husbands, in his own name, as principal in the bond.

The motion has been seasonably made and must prevail.

The appeal is therefore dismissed, with costs.