Caines v. Fisher
New York Court of Chancery
THIS was an application to the court, by petition, that the commissions issued to take the answers of the defendants, in England, be returned, in a short time, or that the bill, as against them, be taken pro confesso. The bill was filed on the 30th of July, 1808 ; an appearance was entered by the two defendants, being aliens resident abroad, on the 23d of November, 1808, by Mulligan, as their solicitor.
Read the full summary
THIS was an application to the court, by petition, that the commissions issued to take the answers of the defendants, in England, be returned, in a short time, or that the bill, as against them, be taken pro confesso. The bill was filed on the 30th of July, 1808 ; an appearance was entered by the two defendants, being aliens resident abroad, on the 23d of November, 1808, by Mulligan, as their solicitor. It was alleged that notice of this appearance was served on the plaintiff’s solicitor; but the knowledge of the fact was denied. On the 15th of August, 1809, an order was granted, that the…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
if the defendant, after appearance; will not answer, but stands out to a contempt, the bill will be taken pro confesso. This is the general rule and practice of the court; (1 Harris. Ch. Pr. 274—277.;) and it is essential to justice, for otherwise the plaintiff never could have the benefit of his suit; and, as was observed in the case of Hawkins v. Crook, (2 P. Wms. 556.,) and afterwards by Lord Hardwicke, in Davis v. Davis, (2 Atk. 21.,) it is consonant to the rules and practice of courts of law. Lord Hardwicke was inclined to think, that after an insufficient, as well as…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Executors of Brasher v. Van CortlandtNew York Court of Chancery · 1816