Case Name: DELAUNEY v. HERMANN
Court: United States Circuit Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1830-04
Citations: 7 F. Cas. 388
Docket Number: 
Parties: DELAUNEY v. HERMANN.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Cases
Volume: 7
Pages: 388–388

Head Matter:
Case No. 3,757.
DELAUNEY v. HERMANN.
[1 Baldw. 132.]
Circuit Court, E. D. Pennsylvania.
April Term, 1830.
Equity Practice—Dismissal op Bill—Delat in Prosecution.
The court will not dismiss a bill for want of proceeding in the cause for three terms, without giving one term’s notice of the application for dismission.
In this case a bill was filed to October 1825; an answer put in March 1826; exceptions taken and a new answer filed June 1826. On tlie 11th of October 1826, the plaintiff took out a commission to Bordeaux, which has never been executed or returned. The plaintiff lias filed no replication, or taken any measures to procure testimony, or to bring the cause to a hearing.
On the first day of this term, Mr. Rawle moved to dismiss the bill with costs.

Opinion:
BALDWIN, Circuit Justice.
There has undoubtedly been very great delay on the part of the complainant, which is not satisfactorily accounted for; but the respondent has had it in his power, under the thirteenth and seventeenth rules of the supreme court, to compel a reply and a hearing of the cause, which has not been done. He now asks for a dismission, according to a rule of the English court of chancery, authorizing it, where the complainant lias omitted for three terms to proceed in the cause. 2 Madd. Ch. 385. As this rule has never been acted on in this court, we should deem it a rigorous proceeding to enforce it now for the first time, and therefore enlarge it till the next term, of .which notice must be served on the complainant