Case ID: nc_3/html/0156-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Judge JJall\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Smith vs. Estes and Mallett.
    
    AfiKIS time 12 months, the bill was abated as to Estes, and ad order made by the master to lake on account.
   Judge JJall

now renewed that order, though it was strenuously urged there had never been a decree to account. He did it he said, upon the ground of the former order ; but he considered the practice to be in some cases, ‘hat such a reference did not preclude the parties from insisting that he Ought not to be decreed to account. And owing to the particular circumstances of this ca£e, he would consider that the reference should not conclude, if the merits ware with the defendant; but he would not order that the said reference should not preclude Mallett fretft insisting that he should not be decreed to account-»

Sjntre-de hoc»