Court Opinion

ID: 9851674
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 05:17:30.582955+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:22:11.941785
License: Public Domain

On Motion eor Rehearing.
Carlisle, J.
While it is true that the failure of the plaintiff in error to make the other two sureties parties to the bill of *235exceptions is, under tlie circumstances of this case, an amendable defect, and the plaintiff in error has filed, along with his motion for rehearing, an amendment in which he seeks to make the other two sureties parties plaintiff in error, it was made clear in the original opinion in this case that the other two sureties were necessary parties defendant in error, and that they should have been so named and served with a copy of the bill of exceptions or that an acknowledgment or waiver of service of the bill of exceptions should have been secured with an agreement that this court might proceed to consider the case on its merits. Since these things could have been done during the time allowed for rehearing following the announcement of the decision, but, instead of doing so, the plaintiff in error has sought to pursue another course, which is not permissible under the circumstances of this case, we take it that he has been unable to secure a waiver of service of the bill of exceptions and agreement by them that this court consider the case on its merits, without which this court has no jurisdiction to consider the case, as we have pointed out in the original opinion. The original judgment of dismissal is adhered to on rehearing.

Judgment adhered to on rehearing.

Gardner, P. J., and Townsend, J., concur.