Case Name: Halhead v. Ross et al.
Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 1789-01
Citations: 1 Dall. 405
Docket Number: 
Parties: Halhead v. Ross et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: United States Reports
Volume: 1
Pages: 420–421

Head Matter:
Halhead v. Ross et al.
Practice. — Rule for trial or non-pros.
Moylan had entered a rule for trial at the last term or nonpros. The rule being continued until this term, a plea was added, and particular facts referred; and upon these, a report had been made, a few days before the day appointed for the trial of the cause.
Lewis, for the plaintiff,
now objected to the trial’s coming on ; and Moylan insisted that he was entitled to a nonpros. But by—

Opinion:
*McKean, Chief Justice.
The subsequent plea and reference virtually vacate the previous rule for trial or non-pros. The cause must, therefore, be continued, under a new rule.