Union Bank of Georgetown v. Crittenden
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia
The declaration, in this cause, had been sent out with the writ, and served twenty days before the appearance term, according to the Maryland. Act of 1763, c. 23, § 4, — and the defendant entered his appearance in proper person.
Read the full summary
The declaration, in this cause, had been sent out with the writ, and served twenty days before the appearance term, according to the Maryland. Act of 1763, c. 23, § 4, — and the defendant entered his appearance in proper person. At the next term a rule was laid on the defendant to plead by the plea day, which was some day after the end of the term; the judgment-by default, for want of plea, however, was entered at the same term, (June term, 1820,) before the expiration of the rule to plead; and an execution was issued thereupon, returnable to the present term. now moved to quash the execution…
1Opinion of the Court
The Court
(nem. con.) having taken time to consider, quashed the execution, set aside the judgment, and reinstated the cause.
2Cited by11 opinions
- Andrews v. HerriotNew York Supreme Court · 1825
- Phillips v. GreggSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1840
- Adams v. WaySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1866
- Glass v. GlassSupreme Court of Alabama · 1884
- Mahurin v. BickfordSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1834
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.