Langly v. Stoke

Decided July 1, 1793

THE plaintiff counted directly in the time of King James, contra pacem domini regis nunc, &c. and, after verdict non allocatur in arrest of judgment, quia matter of form, if the whole had been omitted, it would not have arrested the judgment after verdict.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently January 1818

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1793-07-01

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Doderidge, J.

¶1agreed to the case put by Davenport, Serj. where a jury were had, at the bar to try the issue in the case of one Drake, and dismissed; because the exception, was taken in time. So 2 E. 4. 33. Godb. 399. Noy 97. Jones 172.