Lane v. Ellzey

4 Va. 504
CourtVirginia Chancery Court
DecidedFebruary 15, 1810
StatusPublished

This text of 4 Va. 504 (Lane v. Ellzey) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Virginia Chancery Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Lane v. Ellzey, 4 Va. 504 (Va. Super. Ct. 1810).

Opinion

J:y me Chancellor.

If the defendant was in contempt to liie decree of the Court, he would not be allowed to make any application, but upon such conditions as should be just: but he is not. It is true, the decree was obtained by default ; but this was the consequence of his contempt to the fret process of the Court; and should not be considered as a contempt to the decree, which was obtained in a shorter time on that account; whereby the plaintiff was really benefited. The rule of practice is, that after being in contempt, no plea or demurrer shall be admitted, but upon motion in open Court: and, for the reason before given, that the Court may judge whether it be really a plea to the justice of the case or not, it was very proper, that the attorney-general should file his plea in Court; and, if it be such a one as the Court should have received before the decree, and when the defendant was in contempt to the. original process, it should be received now : because it goes to shew that the plaintiff is not entitled to the aid of the Court, under any circumstances, if the contract be usurious.* and now, as to the terms: the defendant must pay the costs of the bill of review, as well in this Court as in the Court of Appeals; and so the plea was admitted.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
4 Va. 504, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lane-v-ellzey-vachanct-1810.