Skip to content


Western Air Line Construction Co. Vs. Mcgillis - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number127 U.S. 776
AppellantWestern Air Line Construction Co.
RespondentMcgillis
Excerpt:
.....decided april 16, 1888 127 u.s. 776 original motion in a cause brought here by writ of error to the circuit court of the united states for the northern district of illinois syllabus the court, for reasons stated in its opinion, denies a motion to vacate a supersedeas or to make an order that the appeal bond filed in the case does not operate as a supersedeas. the defendants in error made the following motion: "and now come the defendants in error in the above cause, by john s. cooper, their attorney and counsel, and move the page 127 u. s. 777 court to vacate the supersedeas in the above cause or for an order declaring that the appeal bond filed by appellant in said cause does not operate as a supersedeas, because the writ of error.....
Judgment:
Western Air Line Construction Co. v. McGillis - 127 U.S. 776 (1888)
U.S. Supreme Court Western Air Line Construction Co. v. McGillis, 127 U.S. 776 (1888)

Western Air Line Construction Company v. McGillis

No. 1283

Submitted April 9, 1888

Decided April 16, 1888

127 U.S. 776

ORIGINAL MOTION IN A CAUSE BROUGHT HERE BY WRIT OF ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT

COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

Syllabus

The Court, for reasons stated in its opinion, denies a motion to vacate a supersedeas or to make an order that the appeal bond filed in the case does not operate as a supersedeas.

The defendants in error made the following motion:

"And now come the defendants in error in the above cause, by John S. Cooper, their attorney and counsel, and move the

Page 127 U. S. 777

Court to vacate the supersedeas in the above cause or for an order declaring that the appeal bond filed by appellant in said cause does not operate as a supersedeas, because the writ of error was not sued out or served within sixty days after the rendering of the judgment entered and complained of in said cause."

"JOHN S. COOPER"

" Attorney and Counsel for Defendants in Error "

MR. JUSTICE MILLER: This is a motion to vacate what is called a supersedeas. The papers show that the writ was neither sued out nor served within sixty days after the rendition of the judgment which is the subject of the writ of error. It follows, as a matter of course, that the writ cannot operate as a supersedeas, and we know of no motion that is necessary or proper in this Court on that subject. Writs of supersedeas do not issue unless it may become necessary from some peculiar circumstances. The statute declares that when, within sixty days, the plaintiff sues out his writ of error, files it with the clerk of the proper court, and then gives a bond within a certain time mentioned by the statute, that the bond, if approved for that purpose by the judge who grants the citation and the writ of error, shall operate as a supersedeas. It is a matter of law whether it operates as a supersedeas. There is no evidence here of any proceeding to collect a debt which has been disregarded. At all events, there is no occasion for a supersedeas.

The motion is denied.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //