Case ID: f-cas_3/html/0009-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "THE COURT,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Case No. 1,198.
    BEATTY v. VAN NESS.
    [2 Cranch, C. C. 67.] 
    
    Circuit Court, District of Columbia.
    Dec. Term, 1812.
    Practice — Filing Plea or Limitations after Rule-Dat.
    The court will permit the plea of limitations to be filed after the rule-day, upon an affidavit showing it to be a fair defence under the circumstances of the case.
    
      [NOTE. Upon the trial of this cause, the jury found a verdict for defendant, and, on writ of error, the supreme court affirmed the judgment of the circuit court, treating the case upon its merits. Beatty v. Burnes, 8 Cranch, (12 U. S.) 98.]
    At law. Assumpsit [by Beatty’s administrator against Yan Ness, administrator of Burnes] for money bad and received, brought under the act of Maryland of 1791, (chapter 45, § 5,) to try the title to some city lots claimed by plaintiff’s intestate.
    The defendant, after the rule-day, moved to file the plea of limitations, upon his affidavit that he ordered the pleas to be filed by his attorney before the rule-day; that this attorney was absent attending the trial of Wilkinson; that Burnes had been in possession more than twenty years, &c.
   THE COURT,

(nem. con.,) upon this affidavit, permitted the plea to be filed, considering it a fair defence under the circumstances.