Lytle v. Hays

1 Tenn. 190

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Both parties seem to have considered the second plea which is now in contest, as complying with the order. The court, since issue is joined must consider it as having been offered in that view. The plaintiff by replying to it shews that he considered it so; otherwise,if not issuable,he might have treated it as a nullity, and taken judgment by default. An issue is now joined on this plea, and must be considered as having been formed under the authority of the order of last term—This is not similar to the case of Lucas vs Sevier. *

Let the jury be sworn.

* See 5. T. R. 157. 3. N. Y. T. 131. 1. Crom. Pr. 307. to 311.