Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
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
Docket Number
Attorney(S)

HENLY and HASTINGS, Respondents, v. L. W. HASTINGS, Appellant

         JUDGES: Heydenfeldt, Justice, delivered the opinion of the Court. Murray, Chief Justice, concurred.

         OPINION

          HEYDENFELDT, Judge

         In February, 1853, the District Court on an ex parte motion, ordered to be stricken out, a marginal entry of satisfaction of a judgment, which had been rendered two years before. This was a wrongful exercise of authority, and is a proper subject for the reviewing power of this Court.

         But the defendants do not appeal from that order. They make a motion to set aside that order, and then appeal from the refusal to grant their motion. This is certainly not revisable: it is the mere negative action of the Court declining to disturb its first decision. It is that decision which is the proper subject of complaint, and the refusal to alter it, any number of times, would not make it less so. There must be observed in appeals to this Court, the order and regularity which belong to well-established principles founded in sound reason.

         The appeal is dismissed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

Henly and Hastings v. Hastings
(Oct 1, 1853)