Dove v. Blair

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

Dove v. Blair

30 F. Cas. 1077, 2 Hayw. & H.D.C. 200, 1856 U.S. App. LEXIS 602

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

DecidedJanuary 25, 1856

StatusPublished

This text of 30 F. Cas. 1077 (Dove v. Blair) 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

Dove v. Blair, 30 F. Cas. 1077, 2 Hayw. & H.D.C. 200, 1856 U.S. App. LEXIS 602 (circtddc 1856).

Pincite

Opinion

And thereupon the said motion in arrest of judgment coming on regularly to be heard, the plaintiff, by his counsel, objected to the same being heard by this court, on the ground that the said motion was not filed in time, according to the usage and practice of this court, and on the further ground that said motion was filed after judgment was rendered, and a fieri facias issued thereon, said judgment having been rendered on the 23d of April, 1855, and said fieri facias having been' issued on the 8th of May following, and THE COURT, having heard and considered the said objection, refused to consider the said motion in arrest of judgment, and order and direct the same to be dismissed. Motion dismissed.

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

And thereupon the said motion in arrest of judgment coming on regularly to be heard, the plaintiff, by his counsel, objected to the same being heard by this court, on the ground that the said motion was not filed in time, according to the usage and practice of this court, and on the further ground that said motion was filed after judgment was rendered, and a fieri facias issued thereon, said judgment having been rendered on the 23d of April, 1855, and said fieri facias having been' issued on the 8th of May following, and THE COURT, having heard and considered the said objection, refused to consider the said motion in arrest of judgment, and order and direct the same to be dismissed. Motion dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

30 F. Cas. 1077, 2 Hayw. & H.D.C. 200, 1856 U.S. App. LEXIS 602, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dove-v-blair-circtddc-1856.