Case Name: Alexander v. Patten
Court: United States District Court for the District of Columbia
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1806-07
Citations: 1 Cranch 338
Docket Number: 
Parties: Alexander v. Patten.
Judges: 
Reporter: Reports of cases argued and determined in the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia (District of Columbia - reported by Mackey)
Volume: 1
Pages: 338–339

Head Matter:
Alexander v. Patten.
The defendant is not, of course, entitled to a continuance, upon the death of the plaintiff.
The plaintiff died since the last term, and the administrator appears at this term. The issue was made'up at the last term.
Mr. Youngs, for the defendant,
contended that he was of right entitled to a continuance. By the Act of Assembly of Virginia, (P. P. 110, § 20,) all suits abate by the death of a party, unless there has been a verdict or interlocutory judgment. But the Judi ciary Act of 1789, [1 Stat. at Large, 73,] provides that the suit shall not abate, but that the defendant shall answer thereto.

Opinion:
The Court
refused a continuance as a matter of right under the Act of Congress, which was admitted by all the bar to be in force in such a case, as it provides for a case different from that in the Virginia Act. The Court referred to the case of Codman v. Wilson, in the Supreme Court, where the point was decided.