Miller v. Hickman

Superior Court of Delaware

Miller v. Hickman

40 A. 192, 17 Del. 263, 1 Penne. 263, 1898 Del. LEXIS 16

CourtSuperior Court of Delaware

DecidedApril 12, 1898

DocketAction on the case No. 161

StatusPublished

This text of 40 A. 192 (Miller v. Hickman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Delaware primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Miller v. Hickman, 40 A. 192, 17 Del. 263, 1 Penne. 263, 1898 Del. LEXIS 16 (Del. Ct. App. 1898).

Pincite

Opinion

EorB, C. J:—

The rule is that as soon as the calendar is published and announced by the ' Court, subpoenas should be issued for the witnesses, and unless this is done, the party takes the risk of being guilty of laches.

The calendar was made out in this case on Tuesday afternoon April 5th, yet the announcement was not made until Wednesday morning April 6th, after court convened. It is agreed here that this witness went to Philadelphia at eight o’clock a. m. April 6th, and therefore he could not have been served after the calendar was announced.

Under the circumstances, the plaintiff has brought himself within the rule. We. therefore order the case continued to the October term under a peremptory rule.

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

EorB, C. J:—

The rule is that as soon as the calendar is published and announced by the ' Court, subpoenas should be issued for the witnesses, and unless this is done, the party takes the risk of being guilty of laches.

The calendar was made out in this case on Tuesday afternoon April 5th, yet the announcement was not made until Wednesday morning April 6th, after court convened. It is agreed here that this witness went to Philadelphia at eight o’clock a. m. April 6th, and therefore he could not have been served after the calendar was announced.

Under the circumstances, the plaintiff has brought himself within the rule. We. therefore order the case continued to the October term under a peremptory rule.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

40 A. 192, 17 Del. 263, 1 Penne. 263, 1898 Del. LEXIS 16, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/miller-v-hickman-delsuperct-1898.