Case ID: ill_1/html/0277-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Justice Lockwood.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Joseph Duncan, Appellant, v. Ingles and Burr, Appellees.
    APPEAL FROM JACKSON.
    If a defendant in a suit at law can not prove his defense, he should file a bill for a discovery, and if he has a legal defense and neglects to make it, equity will not relieve.
    Blackwell, for appellant.
    Cowles, for appellee.
   Opinion of the Court by

Justice Lockwood.

This was a bill in chancery, filed by the complainant, to perpetually'enjoin a judgment obtained in the Jackson circuit court, in favor of the defendants, against the complainant. The bill states that the recovery was had on a judgment obtained in the state of Kentucky. The court, after a careful perusal of the bill, are clearly of opinion that the bill discloses no ground for the interference of a court of equity. If the complainant could not prove his defense, it was his duty to have filed a bill of discovery when the suit in Kentucky was pending against him. The law is well settled, if a party has a legal defense to a suit at law, and neglects to make it at the proper time, he is precluded from seeking relief in equity. Judgment affirmed with costs, ,

Judgment affirmed. 
      
       Vide Hubbard v. Hobson, ante, 190. Crow’s executors v. Prevo, ante, 216.
     
      
       See note to More et al. v. Bagley et al., ante, p. 94.