Buchanan v. Locke
Buchanan v. Locke
Opinion of the Court
The plaintiffs and appellants complain of a non-suit entered against them, under the following circumstances : Their cause, which was to be tried by a jury, stood last upon the list of cases set down for trial on the 17th of June, 1840. A pre
We feel indisposed, generally, to interfere in cases of this kind, which depend much on the rules of the inferior courts, and in which the Judge must necessarily have much discretion; but it appears to us, that, under the circumstances of this case, which are undisputed, the plaintiffs should not have been nonsuited Had their counsel been present, he could not have pleaded their cause, in the language of article 536 of the Code of Practice, because the tribunal which was to hear it could not be formed. The defendant could' not have tried the cause ex parte, if such had been his desire, there being no jury in attendance. The plaintiffs’ counsel, who, the evidence shows, was ready for the trial, no doubt left the court-room, believing that nothing could be done in his case for some time, as there was no jury in attendance to try it, and as a previous cause was actually in progress of trial, by the attaching of jurors to complete a jury. Justice requires, in our opinion, that the case should be reinstated.
It is, therefore, ordered, that the judgment of the District Court be reversed, and that this case be remanded to be proceeded in according to law; the appellees paying the costs of this appeal.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- William Buchanan and another v. Samuel Locke
- Status
- Published