Case ID: mass_3/html/0192-01.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

Richard Andrews and Another, Plaintiffs in Error, versus Zadock Bosworth.
    If a writ of error is brought by two persons upon a judgment against themselves and another, and the death of the third person is not suggested, the Court wiP quash the writ upon motion.
    The writ of error in this case was brought to reverse a judg merit of the Court of Common Pleas for this county, which was rendered upon an appeal from the judgment of a justice of the peace.
    The original action was trespass against the plaintiffs in error, and a third person, brought by the defendant in error, for an injury *o his horse.
    The writ of error was entered at the last September term, when Ely, for the defendants in error, suggested that there was a diminution of the record of the proceedings before the justice, and moved for a writ to issue to him, to certify the whole record.
    
      Bliss, for the defendants in error,
    observed that the certiorari ought to have issued from the Court of Common Pleas. This writ of error is brought to correct the judgment of that court, whose record only is certified, and not that of the justice.
    
      The Court granted the certiorari de bene esse, without giving any opinion as to the effect of it, and the cause was continued.
    And now, at this term, Ely moves the Court to quash the writ of error, because it is brought in the name of two only of [ * 224 ] *ihe original defendants, the judgment of the Common Pleas being against three, and he cited the cases of 
      Brewer vs. Turner 
      , Walter vs. Stokoe 
      , Radcliffe vs. Buron 
      , and Cooper vs. Ginger 
      .
    
      Bliss
    
    thought the Court might presume the other original defendant dead, and then the writ would be right. He contended, also, that this matter ought to have been pleaded in abatement at the first term, and that at any rate it was too late in the present stage of the cause, after the defendant in error had appeared, and taken his certiorari upon suggesting a diminution of the record, for such a motion to be sustained.
    
      
       1 Sir. 233.
    
    
      
       1 Ld. Raym. 71.
    
    
      
      
        Cases in B. R. Temp. Ld. Hardw. 135.
    
    
      
       1 Sir. 606.
    
   Curia.

Sufficient cause to quash this writ appears on the face of the record certified to us ; and in such case the proper course is by motion .

Writ of error quashed. 
      
       [When judgment is given against several, any of them may bring a writ of error, but it must be in the names of all, for otherwise this inconvenience would ensue, that every defendant might bring a writ of error, and, by that means, delay the plaintiff from having the benefit of his judgment, though it should be affirmed once or oftener.—Arcb. Prac Com. Pl. 1 vol. p. 208, 209.—Ed.]