Case ID: yeates_1/html/0102-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam.\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

*Joseph Galloway against Henry Negle.
    S. C. 2 Dall. 132, 150.
    Notice in writing of an intended motion for a new trial is indispensably necessary.
    This cause had been tried at the last sittings for Philadelphia county, and a verdict had passed for the plaintiff, with a deduction of 7^ years interest accrued during the war, the same being a British debt. A motion for a New trial had been made on this ground by Messrs. Tilghman and Ingersol for the plaintiff, on the first day of this term. They said the dispute respecting the interest was rather to be considered as a point reserved by the court on trial, and cited'4 Burr. 2271, that under special circumstances, a motion for a new trial might be made after the four days.
    Mr. Sergeant, for the defendant, insisted that no point had been reserved by the court on the trial (and with this the j'udges who tried the cause agreed) and that it was indispensably necessary by the 34th rule regulating the practice of the court, that notice in writing of the intended motion for a new trial should be given to the adverse party or his attorney, ten days at least before the term commences. He moved therefore that the motion for the new trial should be dismissed.
   Per Curiam.

The entertaining of the motion for a new trial in this cause would go in direct opposition to the printed orders of the court. There can be no use whatever in making rules for the regulation of the practice of the court unless we adhere to them. Nor do we apprehend there is any danger of injustice in the present instance.

Motion for the new trial dismissed.