Henderson v. Lackey

Tennessee Superior Court for Law and Equity

Henderson v. Lackey

2 Tenn. 109

CourtTennessee Superior Court for Law and Equity

DecidedSeptember 6, 1808

StatusPublished

This text of 2 Tenn. 109 (Henderson v. Lackey) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Tennessee Superior Court for Law and Equity primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Henderson v. Lackey, 2 Tenn. 109 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1808).

Pincite

Opinion

Certiorari; rule to dismiss. — WILKINSON, for the petitioner, said, much inconvenience had arisen from these rules to dismisscertioraris. Upon obtaining a rule, the grounds ought to be stated. The petition disclosed a discovery of material testimony after the trial below. There can exist but two grounds for dismissing, — 1st. The not showing why the ordinary remedy by appeal was not resorted to; 2d. A want of merits apparent upon the face, of the petition. He was inclined to think that the petition ought not to be dismissed, but that it should have a trial here.

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

Certiorari; rule to dismiss. — WILKINSON, for the petitioner, said, much inconvenience had arisen from these rules to dismisscertioraris. Upon obtaining a rule, the grounds ought to be stated. The petition disclosed a discovery of material testimony after the trial below. There can exist but two grounds for dismissing, — 1st. The not showing why the ordinary remedy by appeal was not resorted to; 2d. A want of merits apparent upon the face, of the petition. He was inclined to think that the petition ought not to be dismissed, but that it should have a trial here.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 Tenn. 109, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/henderson-v-lackey-tennsuperct-1808.