Case Name: Winchester and Others v. the President and Directors of the Bank of Alexandria
Court: Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia
Jurisdiction: Virginia
Decision Date: 1811-06-26
Citations: 2 Munf. 339
Docket Number: 
Parties: Winchester and Others v. the President and Directors of the Bank of Alexandria.
Judges: 
Reporter: Virginia Reports
Volume: 16
Pages: 486–487

Head Matter:
Winchester and Others v. the President and Directors of the Bank of Alexandria.
Wednesday, June 26th, 1811.
1. Judgment by Default — Writ Unreturned. — A judgment by default cannot be entered, when the writ has not been returned.
2. Statute — Establishment of Bank — Construction.— The true construction of the 20th section of the act "for establishing a bank in the town of Alexandria” is, that the power of granting appeals, writs of error, or supersedeas is taken away from the appellate court, in relation only to judgments rendered pursuant to that act, and upon writs of capias ad respondendum executed according to the directions thereof.
See, also, as to the right of appeal to the supreme court of the United States, from judgments 'of the circuit court of the district of Columbia, in favor of the bank of Alexandria, 4 Cranch, 384-398, Young v. The Bank of Alexandria.
Upon a writ of supersedeas awarded by a judge of this court to an order of the Ereder-icksburgh district court.
The plaintiffs in error presented a petition to the district court, praying a writ of superse-deas to a judgment of the county court of Spottsylvania, recovered against them by the president and directors of the bank of Alexandria, as assignees of Ricketts & Newton. The judgment was obtained on the 8th of April, 1807, against the drawers of a note, expressed on the face thereof to be negotiable at the said bank; the declaration being filed and a jury empanelled, without any appearance, or opposition on the part of the defendants ; and the clerk certified that the writ was not returned by the sheriff at the time the judgment was rendered. The district court overruled the petition, being of opinion that, under the act incorporating the bank of Alexandria, an appeal, writ *of error, or supersedeas, will not lie, in any case, where a suit is brought by the said bank against the drawer of a note expressed to be negotiable at the said bank.
Williams, for the plaintiffs in error.
Botts, for the defendants.
Judgment by Default. — See monographic note on “Judgments” appended to Smith v. Charlton, 7 Gratt. 425.

Opinion:
Saturday, October 26th.
JUDGE ROANE
pronounced the following opinion of this -court:
"Without considering, or deciding upon, the other questions made in this cause, the court is of opinion that, under the true construction of the twentieth section of the act for establishing a bank in the town of Alexandria, the power of granting appeals, writs of error, or supersedeas, is taken away from the appellate court in relation only to judgments rendered pursuant to the act aforesaid, and upon writs of capias ad responden-dum executed according to the directions of the act; and, as it does not appear of record, in this case, either that any writ issued, or was served upon the plaintiffs, or either of them, prior to the rendition of the judgment in question, the order of the district court is erroneous, because, as is aforesaid, the correcting power of the district court was not prohibited by the act aforesaid, in relation to the case presented to that court by the petition for the supersedeas; therefore it is considered that the order aforesaid of the district court be reversed and annulled, with costs, and this court, proceeding to make such order as the said district court ought to have made, doth order that a writ of supersedeas issue to the judgment aforesaid of the said county court, upon the plaintiff's entering into bond with sufficient security in such penalty as the superior court of law of the county of Spottsylvania shall direct."
Sessions acts of 1792, p. 105.