Hurst's Lessee v. Jones
This text of 4 U.S. 353 (Hurst's Lessee v. Jones) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
4 Dall. 353
1 L.Ed. 864
Hurst's Lessee
v.
Jones.
Circuit Court, Pennsylvania District.
May Term, 1801
A FORMER ejectment, between the same parties, for the same land, had been non pros'd; but the costs of suit remained unpaid.
The defendant's counsel objected to the trial of the present ejectment, until the costs of the former were paid.
By the COURT.
The objection is reasonable and just. The defendant cannot, under such circumstances, be compelled to proceed to a trial.
The cause continued.
Rawle, for the plaintiff.
E. Tilghman, for the defendant.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
4 U.S. 353, 4 Dall. 353, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hursts-lessee-v-jones-scotus-1801.