Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1872-02-03
TEE COURTS.

CIRCUIT CoURT.-Petway VS.. Noel, still
pending. Walsh VS.. Heavier, judgment for
defendant Waugh, administrator, VS.. Eckle-
kamp, respited till Monday.
Law COMMITTEEMAN vs.. Manning.
The jury found that no partnership exist
ed, and that the defendants are indebted to
the plaintiffs in the sum of 1925. jackson
& Adams VS.. Foster ct al, verdict for plain
tifs; damages assessed at $1,114.47. Geo.
Leascher VS.. N. L. Greenfield, judgment for
S1,037.80. Enoch Cunningham VS.. A. NJ.
Tennyson, Judgment for $294.75. Mary
Bright VS.. Thomas Allen, judgment for
$20.10. II. Burnett vs.. 7. B. Castleman,
plaintiff called out. In the two cases of R.
G. Anderson, surviving partner, against
George Moore, the jury were respited.
CRIMINAL CoURT.-The case of George
Bingham and Ben Stevens, charged with
burglary and laceny, was continued the
greater part of the day, and is still pending.
In the case of the State VS.. Peter Joston,
alias Uston, charged with the murder of
Mrs. Hamblin, motion for a change of
venue was argued. Decision reserved.
SUPREME COURT-One section of the
court is still on the Ward & Briggs case,
and in order that the attorneys may con
clude their argument no opinions will be
delivered to-day. The other section of the
court is engaged on the Marshall law docket,
which will be finished by Monday, when the
equity docket of that county will be taken
up. The other section will continue on the
Sumner docket. The Maury docket comes
after the Marshall. Among the opinions de-
livered, last Wednesday, the following, by
Judge Nicholson, may be of interest:
Without an appeal bond the Clerk of
Circuit Court has no right to send up a
transcript to the Supreme Court.
Where an appeal bond in the Circuit
Court is a nullity, it gives no ground for
mandamus, the remedy against the Clerk
being by writ Of error.
James Kicks, er parte. This is petition
for nldndGnlus to require the Clerk Of the
Circuit Court of Cheatham comfy to send
up certified transcript of the record in the
case of Shaw against Kicks, tried in chat
court in 1869. The ground for the applica-
ton is, that when the cause was tried and
determined against petitioner he prayed an
appeal TO this court, and the Circuit Judge
gave him time beyond the adjournment of
court within which TO execute his appeal
bond to the clerk. This he failed to do
from oversight or forgetfhlness until two
days after the expiration of the time. After
he did execute the bond, the clerk refused,
and still refuses, to send up the transcript.
The writ of nGnddnluS lies to compel an Of
ficer 70 perform an official duty; Hum. 437,
Hum. 493, - Hum, SOC.
The Circuit Judge had no power to au-
thorize the Clerk to take an appeal bond
after the adjournment of Court; the taking
of authorizing an appeal bond is judicial
act. The usage of authorizing the Clerk
and Master to take such bonds, by order
of the Chancellor, has been reluctantly &C
guessed in by this Court Cold, 1926.
But no usage has prevailed in the Circuit
Courts. But in this case the bond was
not taken until after the time limited by
the Circuit Judge. The bond was there
fore nullity. Without an appeal bond the
Clerk had no right to send up transcript.
1t is therefore not proper case for man
damus. The remedy of the petitioner was
by writ Of error, after having failed to take
his appeal bond in proper form.
ThepetitiOn for mandamus is disallowed.
NICHOLSON, J.