Delauney v. Hermann

7 F. Cas. 388, 1 Baldw. 132

• Court: U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania
• Decided: April 15, 1830
• Status: Published

Opinion

BALDWIN, Circuit Justice.

There has undoubtedly been very great delay on the part of the complainant, which is not satisfactorily accounted for; but the respondent has had it in his power, under the thirteenth and seventeenth rules of the supreme court, to compel a reply and a hearing of the cause, which has not been done. He now asks for a dismission, according to a rule of the English court of chancery, authorizing it, where the complainant lias omitted for three terms to proceed in the cause. 2 Madd. Ch. 385. As this rule has never been acted on in this court, we should deem it a rigorous proceeding to enforce it now for the first time, and therefore enlarge it till the next term, of .which notice must be served on the complainant