Case Name: The Patriotic Bank v. Bank of Washington
Court: United States Circuit Court of the District of Columbia
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1839-11
Citations: 5 Cranch 602
Docket Number: 
Parties: The Patriotic Bank v. Bank of Washington.
Judges: 
Reporter: Reports of cases argued and determined in the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia (District of Columbia - reported by Mackey)
Volume: 5
Pages: 602–603

Head Matter:
The Patriotic Bank v. Bank of Washington.
Exceptions, to an answer, for insufficiency, may be filed after exceptions for impertinence.
Bill in equity. Mr. Bradley, for the plaintiffs, excepted to a part of the defendants’ answer, for impertinence.
The Court (Thruston, J., not sitting,) sustained the exception. Mr. Bradley then filed exceptions to the answer for insufficiency ; and moved the Court for leave to amend his bill. Cooper’s Eq. 321.
Mr. Mellen, contrá,
objected that the exceptions should all be filed at once; and that after the Court has decided upon exceptions, new exception cannot be permitted. 1 Har. Ch. Pr. 228, 235.
Mr. Bradley, in reply. By the English practice, exceptions for impertinence must be first filed and decided before exceptions for insufficiency will be allowed. Harrison refers only to exceptions for insufficiency. Chitty, Eq. Dig, 872 ; Newland’s Ch. Pr. 184, 185, 190 ; Story’s Eq. PI. 665, p. 867.

Opinion:
The CouRT, having sustained the exception for impertinence, ordered the impertinent part to be cancelled, and permitted the plaintiff to file exceptions for insufficiency.