Seay v. Seay
Seay v. Seay
Opinion of the Court
The complainant’s sobcitor moved the court to allow him to take tbe bill for confessed against some of tbe defendants, who bad failed to defend witbin tbe time prescribed by law. The Chancellor said tbat orders for taking bills pro confesso properly appertain to tbe duties and fimctions of tbe clerk and master, and not of tbe chancellor, and should be made at the Rules and not in court. Lanum v. Steel, 10 Hum.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.