Henderson vs Daniel – clr volume 2 page 123_1

In Henderson v. Daniel, the court addressed the issue of whether the deposit to cover the costs of serving notice of appeal was made within the statutory time limits prescribed by section 756 of the Civil Procedure Code. It was held that failure to make the required deposit within the designated 14 or 20-day period after judgment results in the appeal being deemed abated and, therefore, must be rejected. This decision reaffirmed the principle that procedural compliance with statutory limitations is mandatory, emphasizing the automatic consequence of abatement as provided by the statute in cases of late deposit.

Lawrie J. — The requirements of section 756 of the Civil Procedure Code were detailed, establishing that the deposit to cover service expenses must accompany the petition of appea