Case ID: cow_7/html/419-1-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Curia.\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Jackson, ex dem. Rowan, against Johnson.
    UTICA,
    August, 1827
    Where anew trial is granted „n the piaintiff’s motion, he must take no-of k and proceed, to trial without notice fendant^ifhe do not, he maybe nonsuited. A party ob-right to wait for notice of it from the adverse party.
    A. Hackley, for the defendant,
    moved for judgment as . „ in case of nonsuit.
    
      *D. Russell, contra,
    objected that a new trial had been once granted on the part of the plaintiff: and that he i t • „ . , , not had notice of the rule. That fact should be shown before this motion can be made. (Jackson v. Wilson, 9 John. 265.)
    
      Hackley
    
    said that was the case of a motion for a new trial made by the defendant.
   Curia.

It does not apply for that reason. A party who obtains a rule must take notice of it. There is no propriety in his waiting for a notice from the adverse party.

Motion granted.