9 Iowa 325 | Iowa | 1859
The sixty-sixth rule of practice of the District Court for the Sixth Judicial District, requires that
Now in this case, we can see many reasons why appellee’s motion was .properly sustained. So far from appellant having any good ground to suppose that it was a criminal proceeding, the entire record from first to last shows that it was treated and regarded as a civil action. Then it was the duty of the clerk under the rule, to docket, the case, and if he . placed it in the wrong calendar, the motion of the State to' affirm was sufficient to advise appellant that it was regarded by appellee as coming within the rule requiring pre-payment of fees. The replication to the answer filed on the morning of the first day, could give appellant no advantage, for the State had a right to prepare the case for trial, upon the supposition that the appeal would be properly perfected. And
The objection that the justice had no jurisdiction — that his judgment was void, and that there was therefore nothing to affirm, is untenable. The State could sue upon the bond by ordinary civil action, or bring scire facias. State v. Gorley and Cloud, 2 Iowa. The justice had jurisdiction of the persons of the defendant and also of the subject matter, and if there was any inequality in the proceedings, they ceased to be material after the taking of the appeal.
Judgment affirmed.