McGrath v. Balser
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Error to the Franklin Circuit. Chancery. Case 31. It is the general rule that where process is served on an original bill, that the defendant is bound to take notice of all subsequent proceedings in the cause, tho’ there are exceptions. where the par-chancery ''had amfssaf^of8,the suit and an order was given by complainant for defendant^10 had sumeof°monlya upon filing an plemental ^Si nongcompliance of defendant and asking a decree agreeably to the proSss°"should suchbiUUed…
Read the full summary
Error to the Franklin Circuit. Chancery. Case 31. It is the general rule that where process is served on an original bill, that the defendant is bound to take notice of all subsequent proceedings in the cause, tho’ there are exceptions. where the par-chancery ''had amfssaf^of8,the suit and an order was given by complainant for defendant^10 had sumeof°monlya upon filing an plemental ^Si nongcompliance of defendant and asking a decree agreeably to the proSss°"should suchbiUUed °n
1Opinion of the Court
Judge Marshall
delivered the opinion of the Court.
Although it be in general true, that defendants served with process on the original bill, are bound to know all subsequent proceedings taken in the suit, and need not be again served with process upon new pleadings by complainant in the same, yet there are many cases in which the application of this rule would occasion great injustice and oppression. A defendant might be willing to submit to the claim made upon him in the original bill, or he may have been made a party without any claim being made upon him, but merely to conclude him by the…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Joyes v. HamiltonCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1874