Kirkpatrick v. Munn

Summary

The Mississippi Supreme Court held that sureties on a supersedeas appeal bond were not liable for a judgment entered after the appealed judgment was affirmed as to liability but reversed and remanded for a new trial on damages. The court concluded that the appeal had been prosecuted "with effect," the judgment appealed from had not been affirmed, and the bond therefore was not breached.

Holdings

1. A surety on a supersedeas appeal bond is not liable for a judgment entered after remand when the Supreme Court affirmed liability but reversed the appealed judgment and remanded for a new trial on damages.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a surety on a supersedeas appeal bond is liable when the appealed judgment was affirmed as to liability but reversed and remanded for a new trial on damages.
2. Whether the phrase "prosecute said appeal with effect" and the condition "if the same be affirmed" were satisfied when the appellant obtained a partial reversal and remand.

Disposition

reversed