
    William W. Smith v. Preston Mitchell.
    'Where plaintiff in error failed to give notice of suing out tlio writ of error, but served assignment of errors, anil defendant in error a year and a half thereafterjnovod to dismiss the writ for want of notice of its being issued, it was held be was too late to take advantage of the omission.
    
      Heard and decided October 29th.
    Error to Calhoun Circuit.
    
      JS. A. & I. Gf. Noyes,
    
    moved to dismiss the writ of error in’"this cause, on the ground that no notice of the issue of the writ was ever served on defendant in error or his attorney, as required by the rules.
    
      ~W. 3. JDrown, contra,
    
    objected that the motion came too late. The writ of error was issued in March, 1860, and Mr. Brown showed by affidavit that in April, 1860, the attorney for defendant in error was served with copy of the assignment of errors, and that in receiving it he made the remark that it was all right, or something to that effect.
   The Court

held that the application was too late. The object of requiring notice to be given of the writ, is that the defendant in error may be apprised of the proceedings which are being taken; and when he is otherwise informed, and does not move promptly to take advantage of the omission, he will be held to have waived the objection.  