Court Opinion

ID: 9810241
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 21:44:21.360246+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:39:30.660235
License: Public Domain

Cr.ARK, C. J.,
concurring in result’: Revisal, 370, which allows a new action within twelve months after a nonsuit without restriction, was sometimes abused by action after action being instituted after a cause was nonsuited for which the only remedy was a bill of peace. As some restriction the Legislature enacted a proviso to that section,Laws 1915, ch. 211, as follows: “Provided, that the costs in such action shall have been paid by the plaintiff before the commencement of a new suit, unless said first suit shall have, been brought in forma-pcmperia.” It would seem that this statute meant what it plainly, said, and that it is a restriction upon the hitherto unlimited liberty of bringing new actions after a nonsuit, if brought in one year. Unless it has this effect there was no purpose in its passage.
This is a condition precedent, on noncomplianee with which the defendant was entitled to have the action dismissed, as on failure to give prosecution bond, Revisal, 450; or appeal bond, Revisal, 593; or on failure of defendant to file defense bond, Revisal, 453, unless the court should extend the time.