Hane v. Goodwyn

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Hane v. Goodwyn

3 S.C.L. 461

DecidedNovember 15, 1804

StatusPublished

This text of 3 S.C.L. 461 (Hane v. Goodwyn) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hane v. Goodwyn, 3 S.C.L. 461 (S.C. 1804).

Pincite

Opinion

The court

(all ihe judges present)

considered the plea as issu. able within the rule of court, and not necessarily unconscientious : and therefore, they thought it ought to have been allowed ; and granted the motion. See 1 Bos & Pul 228. Rucker, and another, v. Harnay, 3 T. R. 124. 1 Sellon’s Practice, 346.

<2fuere. Whether the defendant is intitled to the same privilege and indulgence, where he moves to set aside an interlocutory order for judgment, and for leave to pleau, as where he has obtained a judge’s older for time to plead, ori terms. See 1 Sellon, 346.

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

The court

(all ihe judges present)

considered the plea as issu. able within the rule of court, and not necessarily unconscientious : and therefore, they thought it ought to have been allowed ; and granted the motion. See 1 Bos & Pul 228. Rucker, and another, v. Harnay, 3 T. R. 124. 1 Sellon’s Practice, 346.

<2fuere. Whether the defendant is intitled to the same privilege and indulgence, where he moves to set aside an interlocutory order for judgment, and for leave to pleau, as where he has obtained a judge’s older for time to plead, ori terms. See 1 Sellon, 346.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 S.C.L. 461, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hane-v-goodwyn-sc-1804.