Wilson v. Hamilton
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
In Error. JANE HAMILTON the defendant m error, brought an action ot assumpsit m the Common Pleas of Lancaster county against John Wilson, executor of John Wilson de-> ceased, to recover her share of the residue of the testator’s estate undisposed of by his will.
Read the full summary
In Error. JANE HAMILTON the defendant m error, brought an action ot assumpsit m the Common Pleas of Lancaster county against John Wilson, executor of John Wilson de-> ceased, to recover her share of the residue of the testator’s estate undisposed of by his will. The defendant pleaded non assumpsit and payment, on which issue was joined, and the cause came on to be tried at August Term, 1817. After die jury had been sworn and evidence given, the defendant movet^ f°r leave to plead, that since the bringing of the suit, the plaintiff had intermarried with one Joel Baker, who was still in full…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Gibson J.
It is very certain a plea darrien continuance waves all former pleas; that the defendant must stand or fall by it; and that if put in’ issue it forms the only subject of inquiry before the jury. It admits the original merits to be with the plaintiff, and rests the defence on something that has occurred, or some act that has been done by the defendant since the last continuance of the cause. If it be well pleaded^ issue must be taken on it, or there will be a mis-trial; if it be bad on its face, the plaintiff must demur; but if good, in point…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Lyon v. MarclaySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1832
- Griffith v. EshelmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1835
- Simmons v. ThomasMississippi Supreme Court · 1870
- Sherer v. HodgsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1832
- Lacroix v. Macquart, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1835
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.