Whissenhunt v. . Jones

Two errors are specified in the petition to rehear:—

1. A misconception of the manner in which the defendant, Jones, became a party to the action, and the inference therefrom that he was, as landlord, identified with the other defendants in their defence and not entitled to notiee.

The portion of the opinion to which this exception is intended to apply is in these words:

“ Yount (an evident misprint for Jones) was allowed to come in and defend the action as landlord, and in such case it is settled that no notice before bringing the action is necessary.” Let ns see if this statement is supported…