Case Name: James Figgs, defendant below, plaintiff in error, vs John L. Mumford, plaintiff below, defendant in error
Court: Delaware Superior Court
Jurisdiction: Delaware
Decision Date: 1898-04-13
Citations: 1 Penne. 267
Docket Number: 
Parties: James Figgs, defendant below, plaintiff in error, vs John L. Mumford, plaintiff below, defendant in error.
Judges: 
Reporter: Delaware Reports
Volume: 17
Pages: 267–267

Head Matter:
James Figgs, defendant below, plaintiff in error, vs John L. Mumford, plaintiff below, defendant in error.
Justices of. the Peace— Waiver of Irregular Adjournment.
Where both parties appeared in a Justice’s Court on the day to which a cause stood adjourned, and went to trial without objection, it was a waiver of an objection to a previous irregular adjournment.
(April 13, 1898.)
Fore, C. J., and Pennewill and Boyce, J. J., sitting.
C. W. Cullen for defendant below, plaintiff in error.
R. C. White for plaintiff below, defendant in error.
Superior Court, Sussex County,
April Term, 1898. °
Certiorari directed to George T. Dodd, Esq., a Justice of the Peace in and for Sussex County, (No. 24 April Term, 1898).
EXCEPTIONS.
1. For that it appears from the record that the case was adjourned three times by. the said Justice upon his own motion, and not upon the application of either plaintiff or defendant.
2. For that the Justice adjourned said case when no application had been made by either of the said parties.
3. For that the amount demanded is not sufficiently stated, there being no time stated from which interest accrues or commences nor when the cause of action arose.

Opinion:
Fore, C. J:—
Both parties appeared on the day to which the cause stood adjourned, and the plaintiff did not then object to the delay, but went into a trial. We regard this as a waiver of his objection to previous adjournment, if that were irregular. Wright vs. Hayes, 2 Harr., 390.
Judgment below affirmed.