Docket No. 709
Decided: Tuesday, October 25th, 1892
Opinion: 5 Wash. 123 (1892)
Court: Anders1 Court (1889-1892)
Anders
Dunbar
Hoyt
Scott
Stiles
Note: We post only slip opinion(s) as published at the time of the decision. Please consult Washington Reports printed volumes for the opinion(s) in their final form. Undetermined votes indicate that the opinion(s) have not been evaluated yet.
STATE v. ARMSTRONG, 5 Wash. 123; 31 P. 427 (1892).
No. 709.
SUPREME COURT OF WASHINGTON
October 25, 1892, Decided Original Application for Mandamus.
Court: Application of the relator granted.
Counsel: Prather & Danson, and Turner, Graves & McKinstry, for relator. H. M. Herman, for respondent.
Judge(s) SCOTT, J. ANDERS, C. J., and STILES, HOYT and DUNBAR, JJ., concur.
Opinion By: SCOTT The opinion of the court was delivered by SCOTT, J.--This is an application for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent as clerk of the superior court of Spokane county to transmit to this court the transcript on appeal in the case of Frank Grippen against the relator. The superior court rendered a judgment in said case against the relator, and she gave a notice of appeal. The amount of the bond to be given was fixed by the superior court, whereupon a bond was given by the appellant, with sureties, who justified thereon. Plaintiff filed objections to the bond because of alleged insufficiency of the security, and the clerk refused to send the transcript for that reason, and because he was not satisfied of the sufficiency of the same.
The law as it now stands does not require the appeal bond to be approved by the clerk, as was formerly necessary. Probably this was due to an oversight, as it is eminently proper that such a bond should be approved by an officer of the lower court, at least primarily. Section 1421 of the Code of Procedure provides that if the respondent believes the bond defective, or the sureties insufficient, he may move the supreme court to discharge the same, etc. And this seems to be the only means provided by which the respondent on appeal may contest the sufficiency of the bond given. Such being the law the application of the relator must be granted, and the writ will issue commanding the respondent to certify the transcript to this court.
ANDERS, C. J., and STILES, HOYT and DUNBAR, JJ., concur.