Court Opinion

ID: 9855944
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 06:34:39.737718+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:37:18.956412
License: Public Domain

Yeates, Justice.
I concur, generally, in the opinion expressed by the Chief Justice, that there is not sufficient ground to except the prefent cafe from the operation of the genera) rule.
BRADFORD, Justice. As I was originally Counsel in this cause, I forbear taking any part in the decision.
■ By the Court:—It is-awarded, that the defendant be dif-eharged, upon payment of the principal fum. recovered, with colts.*

 A writ of error was brought by the Plaintiff and on the 18th of July 1793, the High Court of Errors and Appeals delivered the following judgment.
By the Court:—After making consideration and due deliberation, it is considered by the Court here—1st. That the last judgment or decretal order of the Supreme Court. That Andrew Caldwell shall be discharged from the said judgment on the payment of £4016 9s. 4d to wit, the principal sum found due to Vance, Caldwell & Vance, by the second report of the referees, and all costs of suit,” be reversed ad. That the judgment in the Supreme Court rendered in the Term of January 1791, in favor of George Fitzgerald, the plaintiff in Error, for the sum of £5009 5s. 1d. with the costs of suit, and by agreement of the parties, Rated, in the Record, made absolute in January Term, 1792, be, and the same is hereby, according to the terms of the said agreement, affirmed and made stable.
The record was thereupon remitted to the Supreme Court.