6 Kan. App. 878 | Kan. Ct. App. | 1897
On December 27,1888, tbe plaintiffs commenced an action in the District Court of Pawnee County, Kansas, against George E. Hubbard, by filing therein a paper purporting to be a petition, and causing a summons to be issued and served upon said Hubbard.
On March 9, 1889, an affidavit of M. E. Haseltine, agent of the plaintiffs, was filed in said court, and a bond was filed, signed by Long Brothers by M. E. Haseltine, agent, as principals, and the Larned State Bank by Clark Gray, president, as surety, and an order of arrest was issued upon which the defendant, George E. Hubbard, was arrested. He gave a bail bond and was released. On January 9, 1892, the attorney for the defendant presented to the court a telegram from the defendant stating that he was sick and unable to attend court, and he also presented a physician’s certificate corroborating the statements made in the telegram, and asked for a continuance until the
On April 28, 1892, the court sustained the motion to set aside the judgment, but took no action upon the motion to set aside the order of arrest. The plaintiffs were allowed to file an amended petition, and the cause was continued until the next term of court.
On May 18, 1892, the plaintiffs filed their amended petition. The defendant answered the amended petition, denying the jurisdiction of the court because no service had been made upon said defendant subsequently to the filing of the amended petition.
On January 6, 1893, the court took up the motion of the defendant asking that the order of arrest be vacated and set aside, and on January 7, 1893, set
The plaintiffs bring the case here for review, and in their brief make the following specifications of error :
1. The setting aside of the original judgment, of date of January 11, 1892.
2. Vacating, on the sixth day of January, 1893, the order of arrest.
3. The-holding that the affidavit for the order of arrest was not sufficient.
4. The holding that the amended petition did not relate back to the .date of filing of the original petition.
The bond required, before an order of arrest can be issued by the clerk, is set out in section 149 of the Civil Code, which reads as follows :
‘ ‘ The order of arrest shall not be issued by the clerk until there has been executed by one or more sufficient sureties of the plaintiff a written undertaking, to the effect that the plaintiff shall pay to the defendant all damages which he may sustain by reason of the arrest if the order be wrongfully obtained, not exceeding double the amount of the plaintiff’s claim stated in the affidavit.”
A bond complying with the terms and conditions of this section is a prerequisite to the authority of the clerk to issue the order of arrest. If an order of arrest is issued by the clerk without such a bond, it is
The judgment of the District Court is affirmed.