Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

6 Tenn. 30

Stuart v. Pasmore

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided March 15, 1818

Tennessee Supreme Court · decided 1818-03-15

[Appeal. — Affirmance.^ Appeal to the Dixon Circuit Court from the County Court, and from the Circuit Court to this court. The cause of appealing to this court was, that the appeal not having been brought up in 15 days before the term, the judgment of the County Court was affirmed ; whereupon an affidavit was filed showing causes for a new trial, which was refused.

Relies on Weakly's Lessee v. Wilson and Simmons · Suggs v. Suggs · Norwood v. Humphreys

Decided 1818-03-15

Per Curiam.

¶1The motion for a new trial was properly rejected. The cause was out of court. The appellee looks at the files on the last day appointed for the return of the appeal to the clerk of the court appealed to, and finding it not there, goes home, and is the more off his guard when his judgment is affirmed. Is it possible that thus absent and unsuspecting, a motion of so much importance can be made against him and sustained ? The Circuit Court acted correctly. Could the court refuse affirmance, and after doing by affirmance what the law required, undo it, as if it were illegal ? Certainly not. If we now reverse, it will be because the court has done what the law required. A writ of error should have been taken. The appeal is for the purpose of having a new trial. Whenever this is abandoned and the judgment below affirmed, and the cause removed to this court, the question is upon the error of that affirmance, not upon errors not brought before the court.

¶2Affirm the judgment.

¶3See, Duncan v. McGhee, 7 Yer. 103; McDonald v. McAlister, 7 Yer. 304; Gregory v. Burnett, 1 Hum. 60; Nichols v. Colville, 1 Tenn. 2; Norwood v. Humphreys, 2 Tenn. 188; Bustard v. Cheatham, 1 Tenn. 370; Foster v. Carter, 2 Sneed, 1; Furber v. Carter, 2 Sneed, 1; King’s Digest, 5640-47.

/6/tenn/30 · .json · Public domain