Haines v. Corliss
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
This was an action brought by the plaintiff, then a feme sole, against the defendant for driving his cart against the plaintiff’s chaise. At April term, 1807, the defendant filed a plea in abatement, that since the last continuance, the plaintifl [ *660 ] *had intermarried with one Evan Merrill, and prayed judgment if she ought to be answered to her writ, and for his costs. To this plea the plaintiff demurred, and the defendant joined in demurrer.
Read the full summary
This was an action brought by the plaintiff, then a feme sole, against the defendant for driving his cart against the plaintiff’s chaise. At April term, 1807, the defendant filed a plea in abatement, that since the last continuance, the plaintifl [ *660 ] *had intermarried with one Evan Merrill, and prayed judgment if she ought to be answered to her writ, and for his costs. To this plea the plaintiff demurred, and the defendant joined in demurrer. At the last November term, the plea being read to the Court, the counsel for the plaintiff agreed that her writ must abate, but questioned the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
It was very properly admitted by the plaintiff’s counsel, that her marriage pending her suit gave the defendant matter to abate her writ, and, as he has regularly taken advantage of this matter by his plea in abatement, that the writ must abate.
But the principal question arising in the cause is, whether the defendant can have judgment for costs. By the English practice, the defendant could not have costs ; nor can a plaintiff, on obtaining an interlocutory judgment, that the defendant’s plea in abatement is bad, and that he answer further, have costs against the defendant. But by…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Lambert v. LagowIndiana Supreme Court · 1825
- Bobe v. FrownerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1850
- Bates v. EnrightSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1856
- Belknap v. Boston & Maine RailroadSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1869
- Sumner v. PinneySupreme Court of Vermont · 1859