{
  "id": 11270372,
  "name": "EFFIE GRIMES v. PODDY ANDREWS",
  "name_abbreviation": "Grimes v. Andrews",
  "decision_date": "1916-04-19",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "367",
  "last_page": "368",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "171 N.C. 367"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C.",
    "id": 9292,
    "name": "Supreme Court of North Carolina"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "1 Mich., 24",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Mich.",
      "case_ids": [
        1173642
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/mich/1/0024-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "7 Wend., 434",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Wend.",
      "case_ids": [
        2009748
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/wend/7/0434-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "34 Wis., 72",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Wis.",
      "case_ids": [
        8705335
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/wis/34/0072-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "97 Ind., 246",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ind.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "35 S. W., 1020",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.W.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "59 Miss., 664",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Miss.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "166 N. C., 566",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        11270577
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/166/0566-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 228,
    "char_count": 3281,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.426,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 9.505882454708161e-08,
      "percentile": 0.5238233966536273
    },
    "sha256": "376f6dfc7dba00bbcfc0c1c0e937501bca6e0e4cb61ebd0037fc9aef211b9883",
    "simhash": "1:a503fe05581188c8",
    "word_count": 588
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:52:28.143754+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "EFFIE GRIMES v. PODDY ANDREWS."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Beowet, J.\nThe condition of the defense bond in an action for the recovery of real property is \u201cthat the defendant pay to the plaintiff all such costs and damages as the plaintiff may recover in the action/\u2019 etc. The statute requires defendant to give such bond as a condition precedent to filing an answer.\nIt is not questioned that the bond secures the costs of the Superior Court. We are unable to comprehend why it does not cover costs of the Supreme Court as well. The language of the statute is plain, unequivocal, comprehensive, and covers all costs the plaintiff may recover. There seems to be no room for construction. If the Legislature had meant otherwise, it would have said so. We think the point is settled adversely to the respondents by the decision in Kenney v. R. R., 166 N. C., 566, in a well considered opinion by Mr. Justice Walker.\nA similar ruling is made by the Supreme Court of Mississippi upon a statute like ours. Martin v. Kelly, 59 Miss., 664, in which the Court says: \u201cThe surety is not only liable for the costs of the court below, but of this Court, also.\u201d\nIn Tennessee the Supreme Court held that upon a bond \u201cconditioned , to pay all costs and damages,\u201d the sureties are liable for the costs of the appellate Court as well as those of the court below. Bowman v. Harman, 35 S. W., 1020.\nTo same effect is Hendricks v. Carson, 97 Ind., 246, wherein it is held that a bond of a nonresident given in the Circuit Court to secure all costs covers costs of appellate Court. In that case the Court well says: \u201cThe case in the Supreme Court was the same \u2018action\u2019 that had been commenced in the Circuit Court. ' The law gave the defendant the right to appeal the case to the Supreme Court for final determination. The proceedings in the Supreme Court were a regular part of.the legal proceedings in the action, and the costs accruing thereon in the Supreme Court were a part of the costs legitimately accruing in the action, and we think that it is within the letter and spirit of the statute to hold that the bond of a nonresident plaintiff for costs, filed in the Circuit Court, covers the costs that accrued in the Supreme Court on an appeal of that action. Were a contrary rule of construction adopted, in such cases there would be no means of securing the costs accruing in the Supreme Court.\u201d See, also, Smith v. Lockwood, 34 Wis., 72; Traver v. Nichols, 7 Wend., 434; Dunn v. Sutliff, 1 Mich., 24.\nThe respondent sureties are liable for the penalty of the bond only, $200, to be discharged upon payment of the costs of this Court as well as those recovered in Superior Court.\nLet judgment be entered accordingly.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Beowet, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Julius Brown for plaintiff.",
      "Harry Skinner, Albion Dwm, L. G. Cooper for defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "EFFIE GRIMES v. PODDY ANDREWS.\n(Filed 19 April, 1916.)\nAppeal and Error \u2014 Costs\u2014Defense Bond \u2014 Ejectment\u2014Statutes.\nTlie defense Pond and the sureties thereon, in an action of ejectment, Revisal, see. 453, are liable to the amount of the-bond for tbe costs in tbe Supreme Court on appeal as well as those incurred in the Superior Court.\nMotioN in this cause in the Supreme Court by plaintiff for judgment against Harry Skinner and J. F. Pollard, sureties on defense bond in action of ejectment under Revisal, sec. 453, for the costs of the Supreme Court.\nJulius Brown for plaintiff.\nHarry Skinner, Albion Dwm, L. G. Cooper for defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0367-01",
  "first_page_order": 419,
  "last_page_order": 420
}