Overholser v. Clark
Tennessee Supreme Court
In this cause the defendant obtained a rule on the plaintiff at the July Term, 1849, of the Circuit Court of Carter County, to justify his present security or give other and better security, on or before ■ the second day of the next term, or his cause would stand dismissed. At the time of holding the next term the Judge failed to attend, and no court was held.
Read the full summary
In this cause the defendant obtained a rule on the plaintiff at the July Term, 1849, of the Circuit Court of Carter County, to justify his present security or give other and better security, on or before ■ the second day of the next term, or his cause would stand dismissed. At the time of holding the next term the Judge failed to attend, and no court was held. On Wednesday, one of the days of the succeeding March Term, the defendant moved to dismiss the cáuse, for want of a compliance with the rule previously obtained. Two days-before tbe judgment was rendered, the plaintiff appeared in court…
1Opinion of the Court
McKinney, J.,
delivered an oral opinion, in which it was held, on the authority of Bettis v. Mansfield, 11 Humph. 604, that the rule expired at the term at which,' by its terms, the plaintiff was to comply with it. If the defendant fails to dispose of it in some way at that term, he cannot do it afterwards ; and this whether the Court is held or not. [1]
The judgment of the Circuit Court was reversed, and the cause remanded.(1) Irvins v. Mathis, 11 Humph. 603; Sharp v. Miller, 3 Sneed, 42; Bettis v. Mansfield, 11 Humph. 604.
2Cited by66 opinions
- United States v. StowellSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Boley v. DanielSupreme Court of Florida · 1916
- Brower v. Employers' Liability Assurance Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
- Hanlon v. DohertyIndiana Supreme Court · 1887
- Silliman v. GammageTexas Supreme Court · 1881
61 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.