Douglass v. Belcher

15 Tenn. 105
CourtTennessee Supreme Court
DecidedAugust 15, 1834
StatusPublished

This text of 15 Tenn. 105 (Douglass v. Belcher) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Tennessee Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Douglass v. Belcher, 15 Tenn. 105 (Tenn. 1834).

Opinion

Geben. J.

The county court did not err in striking out the plea in abatement. A plea in abatement cannot be pleaded at the same time with a plea in.bar. 1 Bac. Ab. 26: 1 Mass. Rep. 358. The plea in bar is inconsistent with the plea in abatement, and by answering the plaintiff’s actibn overrules the plea in abatement. That plea was therefore properly stricken out by the county court, and the circuit court erred in reversing that judgment.

The judgment of the circuit court will be reversed, and, proceeding to rendér such judgment as that court ought to have givén, the county court judgment will be affirmed:

Catr6ñ, Ch. J. concurred.

Peck, J.

The plea in form is bad; it comiiiences iri bar and concludes in abatement, which makes it a plea in bar. 1 Bac. Ab. Tit. Abatement P. But contain-[106]*106mg no matter m bar, it is for that cause frivolous, and , , , . . was properly stricken out by the county court.

Judgment reversed.

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

Related

Smith v. Franklin
1 Mass. 358 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1805)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
15 Tenn. 105, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/douglass-v-belcher-tenn-1834.