Ex parte Dodge

Headnote

Where a statute declares that an act shall be done within ~a certain number of days, Sunday must be reckoned as one, though it happen to be the last.

E. g. in the time given for appealing by statute, sess. 47, oh. 238, 5. 36; the 50 dol lar act.

A 3USTIOE of Montgomery county rendered judgment against Dodge, at the suit of Smith, November 16th, 1826. The 26th, (the 10th day after judgment~,) being Sunday, Dodge appealed by giving notice, &c., in due form, on the 27th. On. the return coming into the 0. P. in March last, they quashed the appeal, on the ground that it was made one day too late.

now moved for a mandamus commanding them to vacate the rule for quashing, &c.; and that they should proceed with the appeal.

He said the statute (sess. 47, ch. 238, s. 36,) is, that the party shall appeal at the time of rendering the judgment, or within ten days thereafter. One day being exclusive, the last was Sunday. This gave us a right to appeal on

Monday, " statute means 10 juridical days. Sunday being the last, is not reckoned. The 1 Cowen, 18; 2 Salk. 625; 11 East, 271; 13 id. 21; 6 John. 326 ; 4 T. R. 121; 4 Burr. 2130.

admitted that the court in its doctrines of practice, and the construction of its rules, might disregard Sunday, in the computation of time. The cases cited relate only to questions of practice. Upon this, the court makes the law for itself; and where Sunday is the last day, it will not be counted. But no cases can be found extending the same construction to a statute. Was it ever heard, for instance, that in the statutes limiting appeals to the court of errors from interlocutory orders to 15 days, (1 R. L. 134,) prosecutions under the act to suppress vice and immorality to 20 days, (2 R. L. 197,) allowing the landlord to distrain removed goods within 30 days, (1 R. L. 437, s. 13,) and the like cases, Sunday is not to be counted, whether it be the first or the last day ? Is Sunday a blank in counting the various times for the return of process under the 50 dollar act? Cases must often *have arisen, where parties would wish to avail themselves of this doctrine ; but I venture to say it never was sanctioned by any court.