Mexican National Construction Co. v. Reusens — SCOTUS Brief (1885)
[Reusens SCOTUS Case (1885)] actions, ‘‘replevin, and in suits on mortgages; or where ‘‘the property is in the custody of the Marshal, ‘* under admiralty process, as in case of capture or ‘* seizure ; or where the proceeds thereof, or a bond ** for the value thereof, isin the custody or control ‘* of the Court, indemnity in all such cases is only “required in an amount sufficient to ¢:cure the “sum recovered for the use and detention of the ‘property and’ the costs of the snit, and ‘just ** damages for delay,’ and costs and interest on **the appeal.’ — | | It is poeta that the plaintiff in error will now claim, and before Judge Wallace, upon the granting of the writ of error herein, that the undertaking guaranteed by the Fidelity & Casualty Company rendered unnecessary the giv- ing of any other undertaking than the one for five thousand dollars. es The claim is, however, clearly not well founded.