Case ID: hopk-ch_1/html/0086-01.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

Daniel S. Griswold v. William Inman.
    1823. Nov. 15.
    The filing of a replication, after notice given of motion to dismiss bill for want thereof, is good cause against the motion ; but it will only be allowed on payment of costs.
    Mr. Palmer moved to dismiss the bill, for want of a replication to the answei-, which had been filed more than three weeks_
    Mr. Warner showed for cause, that a replication was now filed, since notice of this motion.
    After some inquiry at the bar, and hearing a decision of the late chancellor Kent,
   The Court

said, that the filing of the replication was good cause against the motion; the costs of which, however, must be paid by the complainant.