Case Name: Stealy v. Jackson
Court: Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia
Jurisdiction: Virginia
Decision Date: 1823-03-31
Citations: 1 Rand. 415
Docket Number: 
Parties: *Stealy v. Jackson.
Judges: 
Reporter: Virginia Reports
Volume: 22
Pages: 164–164

Head Matter:
*Stealy v. Jackson.
March, 1823.
Chancery Practice — Appeals—Security after Expiratl0n 2* Term. — (The Chancellor may grant an appeal from his own decree during the term, with an allowance of time to the appellant to give security after the expiration of the term.)
This was an appeal from the Staunton chancery court, where the case was decided in favor of the defendant, the present appellee. The plaintiff prayed an appeai; which was allowed, with permission to the appellant to give bond and security within thirty days.
When the case came on to be argued in this court, Tucker for the appellee, made a preliminary objection, that the appeal was irregularly granted, because the law did not authorise the chancellor to allow the bond and security to be given after the term, where the appeal was taken during the term,
See monographic note on “Appeal ana Error” appended to Hill v. Salem, etc., Turnpike Co., 1 Rob. 263.
1 Rev. Code (of 1819,) p. 206, sec. 50, 51.

Opinion:
JUDGE BROOKE,
March 31. — delivered the opinion of the court.
On the preliminary question, whether the appeal in this case has been regularly granted, the court is of opinion, that though the act of assembly might be susceptible of a different construction, if it were res integra, that which has been adopted by the chancellor, has been so long acquiesced in by this court, that it is now too late to-disturb it. The cause has therefore been considered on its merits, and the court is of opinion to affirm the decree.