Brownlow's Knoxville Whig. [volume] (Knoxville, Tenn.) 1866-1869, 1867-11-13
SUPREME COURIOPINION.
KNcxvILLE, TENNESSEE, SErESBER TERN, 1867.
THOMAS II. ooEDwEIL, ATTORNEY esEHAL AND kEFonTEs.
CALVIN WEBB, LARKIN WEBB IND JASPER WEBB, vs.
THE STATE OF TENNESSEE.

THOMAS Il. coLDwELL ATTORNEY el<EHAL AND kkFoHIER.
CALVIN WEBB, LARKlN WEBB md JASPER wEBB,vs.
THE STATE OF TENNESSEE.
This is an action brought on bad executed by Larkn
Webb, Calvin Webb, with Jasper Webb their security
given required by law in obtan license for the retail
spueus liquors in the county Of onroe dated on the oh
The declaration is in the usual "a One Of tho terms and
conditions Of the bond that they gould keep peaceable
orderly house. The breach aned they did not keep
an orderly and peaceable house. b kept sordery house
That the plaintiffs plead covenants performed, and
the submitted juI 81 The September term
quors of the convtca q Lsrkin Webb Of
the plaintiffs in error, for keeping dlsordery house ana
The record shows the Indictment found the 18th
of SEPTEMBER 1862 arEaiz sd plead mot Guilty to
conviction and he was fined twenty-five collars The Court
instructed the jury f the evidences tFoduced satisfied them
Clerk of the County Court County, to retail spirit
liquors. and while engaged in sta.ling gRaer ssd IL
dcted the of NonIe county before this suit
brought, and convicted Of kelng dsorasFy mouse
the State would be entitled reof the amount OF the BOND
sued this That the ysfess q jury and Judg
mentof the Court which had been ad % le jury sa
house. ,......~.
in for the amount Of the bond new tina was
for which motion overruled ans an appeal ID error "
The question presented for our onsdsraton is the
Judgment rendered in the criminal prosecutions
fact upon which was rendered Eresneaf his work
Evidence vol 537, says Aa genera rui,
civil establish the fact ueoH which II was render
ed for the if the defendant was convicted u
upon evidence of the plaintiff IN the civil
action, and he acquitted Il have been oy couslsn
with the prosecutors But besides - so spoh more ser
same neither the rules Of decision the course Of proceed
We recognize the principle as eesc aud there seems TO
be little diversity Of opinion a1e5s meusn On
Dcsb ~ ms before the cs The plaintiffs In error,
Larkin Webb and Calvin Webb, condition precedent oI
the suit with Jasper Webb shr security Larkn
Webb was indicted and convicted 3 keeping aisoTdsiriy
OF the criminal law This suit bsght BY the state against
Larin, Calvin and jasper Msse = security As , 9e'Ss r
and criminal the same faere Is mGtuallty.-
IaTn Webb cannot eompian, he present. had an OPP
portunty examine the Ntnesss 20 saases tes.ao
nv and 10 the Judgment i ana the reason
o tno rr,-ccstioa being on the bond is
pri1y ana tie record Of the esnvieea aa a evidence
against him IN t case Of tsss va Bailey ct al Yer
Ger M "a sudgmen by coafesss principal upon tn
tss IL Evidence against tbs surE but not conclusive
that they nay prove esth sae cts as show the pTn
e sd been seiisd Ii sskay Of the Courts Of tn
$50 - Carsaek " tfsel [ommouwealth, Bur
- - - -. t-iI frat inasasstt in actisa aEzins
tus - a. asacsnl ii Manages IN a subsequsn
it IRON rseoeniSsnce sraias seksria aGd his seeuri
tf +, BIT S,lg 5Si 5s has m gwen to the iaassn
~ ~ $50 - and Is seenn8E there have been a.
1870 s seie evidence upos - points established b
n : Rasdssph sl2I ne sane sfineFie N<s settled i
siaisr fBat sk< 5ndznsnt Of conyiction q Lar
- - - e5l3ssct against him sad lis surety
9. - 49, vas ~ - Cou7t il he instruc
49, 49, f-s Lsrka SD Ssspsr Webb. But
ssst 3 < 4 applicable e esssip Tetb Though be
.s - VS. not tried ard sfs any thing appeariuE i
IA Is may have bees disebsEesd, be may have sci
- Interest before the hndlEE 81 tte Indictment He ms
svc been present cou9 pot ryent the action ef "a
eties In rafiu the dfurhance st produced the ccnvts
ton Lsrkin Webb. AZ 80 Gaszn Webb upon the piaus,
principles Of the law evidence ne Cor
erred in instruotng the ary i vas aes esideaee
him. the judgment ing erroneous AZ to Calvin Webb ht
Is the legal effect 70 iaFkin and JsepeT PrsFsas q u
act 1851 chap ?, JasneRt vote &c void az
AL The provisions Of this carried fe Tue Code
embraced in section 45l0, which provides that jadgnsn
shall b. reversed in the Supreme Eoart uhess for
Wkch sts the merits Of the jancnt decision deere
compiane Of This Court held ia the Of Bentley
lIexfhal Head s7s ths rule thai Judgment entis
thnr 49, therefore void party cannot be aowe
a. st a 10 any Of the other perti@ purely technics
Judgment say be eefrert as ? ons and e
r0asou anOsher joint party This case il decisive
this pons The jadgment aganst LsEkn Webb and Jasp.
Webb 8 oorree and VALID bat erroneous q 70 cas
ana Jasper Webb VII Be affirmed, a reversed 20 oAir
webb and the cause rcmanaed t. him and nsw tri
| awarded -. ,..,,,,
A tI1scopy. asshAeh ~, y s Sh1,
Test: 6heeeS ~
81 L. PAsTKESeN, Clerk.
| II Covarnor John Albion Andrew of Nessachi