Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

12 R.I. 104

State v. Edgerton

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

Decided July 13, 1878

Supreme Court of Rhode Island · decided 1878-07-13

Scere EACIAS on a defaulted recognizance. On demurrer to tbe writ and on motion for leave to withdraw demurrer and to plead.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1878-07-13

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently July 1974

1 federal appellate · 5 state decisions

2018781880189019001910192019301940195019601970decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Even under the very strict practice in the English courts, under the old system, this was allowed. See Robinson v. Rayley, Burr. 316; and in Collins, Sen., v. Collins, Jun., before Lord Mansfield, Burr. 820, 823, 827, the plaintiff demurred, and after argument and opinion delivered he was allowed to withdraw the demurrer and plead.

¶2And in this country the practice has always been liberal. There is an obvious advantage in having a question of law settled in the beginning of proceedings, as the result may be to save the time of the court and parties, and to save to the State the expense of a jury trial. And with the power which the court has to refuse leave to withdraw, when the demurrer has been obviously filed for delay, and to impose conditions on granting leave, there can be little danger from the practice.

¶3And we can see no reason why this discretion should not be used in a case where the State is a party as well as between individuals.

¶4Motion granted.

/12/ri/104 · .json · Public domain