Williams v. Claflin

Williams v. Claflin. The ruling in Jerome v. McCarter (21 Wall. 17), that where, by reason of the changed circumstances of the case, or of the parties, or of the sureties on á supersedeas bond, so that the security, which at the time it was taken was sufficient, does not continue to be so, this court will, on proper application, so order and adjudge as justice may require, — reaffirmed, and applied to this case. Appeal from tbe Circuit Court of tbe United States for tbe District of South Carolina. Motion to vacate tbe supersedeas, or for a new bond. Mr. George F. Edmunds and Mr. James Lowndes in support of tbe motion. Mr. Philip Phillips and Mr. Samuel Lord, Jr., in opposition thereto. [MAJORITY — Me. Chief Justice Waite] Me. Chief Justice Waite delivered tbe opinion of the court. In Jerome v. McCarter (21 Wall. 17), we said that if, after security on an appeal which operated as a supersedeas bad been accepted, tbe circumstances of tbe case, or of tbe parties, or of tbe sureties on tbe bond, bad changed, so that tbe security, which at tbe time it was taken was sufficient, did not continue to be so, we might, on proper application, so adjudge and order as justice should require. The present appellants are interested only in preserving their security for a debt of tbe railroad company amounting, when tbe decree was rendered, to about $152,000. When they took their appeal, execution of tbe whole decree bad been stayed by another appeal of tbe present appellees, who were tbe complainants below. Consequently the amount of security to be given then by these appellants was a matter of but little importance comparatively. Tbe other appeal has been dismissed, and in this way the circumstances of the ease are materially changed. It is easy to see that what was sufficient security on this appeal when taken is probably not so now. ' The bonds secured by the mortgage according to the decree amount to several millions of dollars, and the value of the security is necessarily subject to the fluctuations of trade. The appellants are to a considerable extent interested in the same bonds, but if their debt is paid in full they cannot complain at the execution of the decree.- The supersedeas herein will be so far modified as to allow a sale of the mortgaged property to be made under the decree, but the court below will retain in its registry, subject to the order of this court until the final determination of the present appeal, so much of the proceeds as shall be sufficient to satisfy and discharge any balance that may remain of the debt due these appellants, after the proportionate share they receive under , the decree upon the bonds and coupons held by them as collateral shall have been applied thereon ; and it is So ordered.