Ex parte Hewitt

Supreme Court of Alabama

Ex parte Hewitt

40 Ala. 300

DecidedJune 15, 1866

StatusPublished

This text of 40 Ala. 300 (Ex parte Hewitt) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ex parte Hewitt, 40 Ala. 300 (Ala. 1866).

Pincite

Opinion

A. J. WALKED, C. J.

The argument of the counsel for the petitioner most satisfactorily shows that a suit in chancery is not embraced in the first section of the “act to regulate judicial proceedings,” approved February 20th, 1866. The regulations of that section, as to appearance, pleading, and trial terms, are not susceptible of application in the chancery court. In that forum, there must be plea, answer, or demurier, within thirty days, or a decree pro confesso may be taken; and the time of hearing causes in chancery can not be governed by the terms of court, but must depend upon the question whether the cause is at issue.

Let the mandamus issue as prayed.

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

A. J. WALKED, C. J.

The argument of the counsel for the petitioner most satisfactorily shows that a suit in chancery is not embraced in the first section of the “act to regulate judicial proceedings,” approved February 20th, 1866. The regulations of that section, as to appearance, pleading, and trial terms, are not susceptible of application in the chancery court. In that forum, there must be plea, answer, or demurier, within thirty days, or a decree pro confesso may be taken; and the time of hearing causes in chancery can not be governed by the terms of court, but must depend upon the question whether the cause is at issue.

Let the mandamus issue as prayed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

40 Ala. 300, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ex-parte-hewitt-ala-1866.