TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

People v. Worth

People v. Worth, 33 P. 913 (Cal. 1893)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
California Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
August 16, 1893
Docket
No. 15,005
Judges
Garoutte
Citations
33 P. 9134 Cal. Unrep. 121
Disposition
Affirmed.
Syllabus
Bail Bond.—The Fact That Judgment on a Bail Bond is rendered against the principal, who was not summoned and who did not appear, does not render it invalid as to the sureties, against whom judgment was also rendered, in accordance with the terms of the bond making each surety liable for the full amount thereof.
Summary
APPEAL from Superior Court, Sonoma County; A. K. Dougherty, Judge. Action by the people of the state of California against Charles H. Worth, as principal, and others, as sureties, on a bail bond. Judgment for plaintiff and the sureties appeal.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Garoutte

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

GAROUTTE, J.

The defendant, Worth, being under arrest, charged with the commission of a criminal offense, was released from custody upon filing an undertaking on appeal, wherein he was principal, and the present appellants sureties. Upon his failure to appear, the bail bond was declared forfeited, and this action was brought to recover thereon. Judgment went for the people, and this appeal is prosecuted by the sureties on the bail bond from the judgment and order denying a new trial. There appears to have been neither a service of summons upon the defendant Charles H. Worth, nor any appearance by him, although the judgment is rendered against him, as well as the sureties upon the bail bond; and upon this ground the judgment is attacked by the appellants. The liability of each surety upon the bond was for the full amount thereof, and the judgment is to the same effect. We are unable to see in what manner appellants are injured by the . judgment of which they complain. The fact that other parties are made liable by its terms should be a source of satisfaction to them rather than of complaint, as it furnishes additional *122 aid in bearing its burdens. Conceding the facts as contended, the wrong done by the trial court was committed against Charles H. Worth, and he has taken no appeal. The judgment is a valid judgment as to appellants in all respects, and its invalidity as to others not complaining is a matter with which they have no concern. We see no valid objection to the form of the order declaring the bail bond forfeited. For the foregoing reasons, let the judgment and order be affirmed.

We concur: Beatty, C. J.; Harrison, J.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 0 cases

No case in this database cites this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list