Case Name: Savings' Institution v. Smith
Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 1847-12
Citations: 7 Pa. 291
Docket Number: 
Parties: Savings’ Institution v. Smith
Judges: 
Reporter: Pennsylvania State Reports
Volume: 7
Pages: 291–292

Head Matter:
Savings’ Institution v. Smith
Corporations may have a writ of error without bail, but it is not a supersedeas.
Jan. 15. The plaintiff in error was a corporation, and had not entered bail in error.
S. V. Smith moved to quash on that ground. By the act of 1817, a corporation cannot appeal without giving absolute se curity, since bail for the appearance would be nugatory. Now appeals and writs of error are put on the same footing; Schuylkill v. Thomas, 18 Serg. & Rawle, 431.
Clarkson, contra.
The object of that act was to place corporations on the same footing with natural persons. This is all we ask. In neither case is the writ a supersedeas without bail. But it cannot be supposed the intention was to deprive corporations of the right of review unless bail absolute was given.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The act of 1817 requires bail in error to be given by a corporation, not to found the writ, but to make it a supersedeas of execution. Corporations are put by it on the footing of natural persons, and any one may sue out a writ of error without bail if he choose to subject his property to execution.
Rule discharged.