Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

116 Mass. 360

McGrath v. Conway

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided December 3, 1874

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · decided 1874-12-03

<p>A person charged under the bastardy act with being the father of a bastard child, executed a penal bond, payable to the plaintiff, conditioned that he should appear at the next term of the Superior Court and answer to the complaint. At that term he was defaulted, and the case was continued without further action on the complaint. Held, that there was a breach of the bond for which nominal damages were recoverable. Held, also, that if, by the defendant’s failure to comply with a subsequent order in the original process, a further sum should become due on the Bond, the plaintiff could sue out a scire facias on the judgment, and obtain a new execution for the damages caused by such additional breach.</p>

Relies on Young v. Makepeace

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1874-12-03

How this case has been cited

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently May 1900

3 state decisions

101874188018901900decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Ames, J.

¶1The condition of the bond, according to the literal import of its terms, requires that the defendant in the original process should appear at the term at which it was returnable. It is true that, under the changes introduced into the practice in cases of this kind, by the Gen. Sts. c. 72, § 7, the personal appearance of the defendant has not the importance which it had under the earlier statutes; Jordan v. Lovejoy, 20 Pick. 86; and the decree of affiliation may be passed, whether he appears or not. Young v. Makepeace, 103 Mass. 50. But as he has distinctly bound himself to appear, his failure to do so must necessarily be considered as technically and formally a breach of the bond. The plaintiff is therefore entitled to maintain her suit, and to have judgment for the penalty of the bond, subject, however, to the provisions of the Gen. Sts. c. 133, §§ 9, 10, that execution shall issue only for so much of the penal sum as is then due and payable in equity and good conscience, for the breach of the condition ; that is to say, for a nominal sum only for this particular breach. If by his failure to comply with such further or final order as the court may pass, in the original process, any further sum should become due on the bond, she can sue out a scire faldas on the judgment, and obtain a new execution for the damages caused by such additional breach.

¶2Exceptions sustained.

/116/mass/360 · .json · Public domain