Bank of Columbia v. Hyatt

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia

Bank of Columbia v. Hyatt

2 F. Cas. 637, 4 Cranch 38, 4 D.C. 38

CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia

DecidedMay 15, 1830

StatusPublished

This text of 2 F. Cas. 637 (Bank of Columbia v. Hyatt) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bank of Columbia v. Hyatt, 2 F. Cas. 637, 4 Cranch 38, 4 D.C. 38 (circtddc 1830).

Pincite

Opinion

THE COURT

(THRUSTON, Circuit Judge, absent)

rejected the plea.

The defendant then pleaded non assumpsit, [638]*638upon which issue was joined, and offered himself ready for trial.

The declaration was joint, and contained no suggestion that one of the defendants had not been taken.

Mr. Lear declined making the suggestion, and contended that he had a right to continue the cause until the other defendant •should be taken, and moved for a continuance on that ground.

But THE COURT refused, and intimated that the plaintiffs were bound now to amend their declaration by adding the suggestion, or to become nonsuit; and that, if the declaration be now so amended, the defendant taken might have leave to plead de novo.

The plaintiffs then had leave to amend their declaration, and the defendant to plead de novo, who thereupon pleaded the statute of limitations; and the plaintiffs, at the next term, entered a non-pros. See Tidd, Pr. 320, 327; Barnes, Notes Cas. 39G, 401; Tidd, 120, :362.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI