Case Name: Frank Starling, Appellant, v. Samuel Burdette et al., Respondents
Court: Washington Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Washington
Decision Date: 1902-04-11
Citations: 28 Wash. 261
Docket Number: No. 3963
Parties: Frank Starling, Appellant, v. Samuel Burdette et al., Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: Washington Reports
Volume: 28
Pages: 261–262

Head Matter:
[No. 3963.
Decided April 11, 1902.]
Frank Starling, Appellant, v. Samuel Burdette et al., Respondents.
DISMISSAL OP APPEAL-SUFFICIENCY OF BOND- — FAILURE OF SURETIES TO JUSTIFY. '
An appeal will be dismissed where the sureties upon the appeal bond have failed to comply with the order of the court to appear and justify as to their sufficiency, and no new bond has been filed by the appellant.
Appeal from Superior Court, King County. — Hon. Jesse P. Houser, Judge.
Appeal dismissed.
Richard Gotean, for appellant.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
— This is an action of ejectment. Judgment went against the plaintiff and he appealed. An appeal bond was filed in due time after the notice of appeal was given, to. the sufficiency of the sureties upon which the defendant excepted, giving notice of a time and place at which the sureties were required to appear before the judge of the superior court and justify as to their sufficiency. The bondsmen failed to appear at the required time, whereupon the defendants moved to- strike the bond from the records. This motion the court refused to grant, but made an order, the effect of which was to grant leave to. the plaintiff to file a new bond. ISTo new bond was filed, and the defendants move in this court to dismiss the appeal. The motion must be granted. By the failure of the sureties to appear and justify, the bond became void, under the • statute, and the attempted appeal, ineffectual. Bal. Code, § 6505, 6510.