Case Name: BOZMAN against ARMISTEAD and FESSENDEN
Court: Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jurisdiction: North Carolina
Decision Date: 1818-01
Citations: 1 Taylor 264
Docket Number: 
Parties: BOZMAN against ARMISTEAD and FESSENDEN.
Judges: 
Reporter: North Carolina Reports
Volume: 4
Pages: 264–265

Head Matter:
BOZMAN against ARMISTEAD and FESSENDEN.
A sci.fa. is remedyPon bond given on obtaining-an injunction whethersuch-ecuted ^be6X" fore or since theactof 1810, C. 12.
This Was a sci.fa. on a bond given on obtaining an in~ ajuncti°n- The Defendants demurred on the ground that acj. 0f iglo, c. 12, allowing a sci.fa. on such bonds . Was passed posterior to the bond in question,

Opinion:
Ruffin J.
delivered the opinion of the Court:
This case is again brought here, upon the objection (.j16 act Qf iglO, c. 12, does not extend to this bond, which was made before the passage of the act. Upon looking into the act, it is found to relate only to the remedy upon injunction bonds, which ⅛ is perfectly competent to alter from time to time as shall seem right to the Legislature—and the true construction of the act, seems to us, to be that the obligee might sue by set. fa. On all such bonds, whether executed after or before the passage of the'law. The Assembly only profess to regulate the fnHe of proceeding on the bond, which the act of 1800, c"- ©, had before required to be taken. And We see no reason why the remedy should be different on one bond from what it is on another. Judgment for Plaintiff on the Be-JO' murrer.