Case ID: cole-cai-cas_1/html/0068-01.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

Church ads. Clason and Stanley.
    HERE were 18 separate causes on one policy, lit July term last, on the refusal of the plaintiffs to enter into the consolidation rule, the court granted imparlances in all the causes but one, and the like in Odor her-term, and noy/ Boyd for the defendant makes application for further imparlances.
    
      Riggs objected.
    He produced an agreement which had been tendered by the plaintiffs to the defendant, and was refused. This he contended would, if accepted, have answered the same purpose as an exact compliance with the rule, and ought to have been received ; and that the defendants, after refusing that offe r, were not entitled to take the effect of the present application.
   Per Curiam.

The English consolidation rule is the. one the court mean to insist on, and they will not permit the plaintiffs to prescribe to them any other.

Let the defendant take the effect of his motion.

The plaintiffs then applied for a rule to examine witnesses, de bene esse, in the one cause which stood open for trial $ but the court refused it, observing, that they were entitled to no indulgence, till they had first acceded to the terms already required.