Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)

JOHN DEN v. JAMES R. LOVE.

The ordinance of the 23d June, 1866, which changed the jurisdiction of the courts, prevented an action from abating before or at Fall Term, 1866, by the death of a defendant in 1864, after the Fall Term of that year.

( Doe v. Avery, ante, 238, cited and approved.)

A motion having been made for notices to issue to the executors of the defendant, upon a suggestion that he was dead; on its appearing to the court that he had died in the fall of 1864, after (436) the Fall Term of the court, the motion was refused, and the suit adjudged to have abated.

From this judgment the plaintiff appealed.

READE, J.

Before the ordinance to change the jurisdiction of the courts, etc. (23 June, 1866), this suit would have abated by reason that two terms had elapsed after the defendant's death without making his executor a party. But that ordinance provides that the time elapsed since 1 September, 1861, barring actions and suits, or presuming the satisfaction or abandonment of rights, shall not be counted. That ordinance prevented this suit from abating. We so held in Morris v. Avery, ante, 238. His Honor's ruling in this case was before that decision. There is error. Let this be certified, etc.

PER CURIAM. There is error.

(437)

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

DEN v. LOVE
(Jan 1, 1868)