Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

19 R.I. 704

36 A 720

Fox v. Hopkinson

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

Decided February 11, 1897

Supreme Court of Rhode Island · decided 1897-02-11

<p>On the day of a decision against him in a district court the defendant died. Upon the probate of his will, and within six months of the death, the administratrix with the will annexed was ci.ted by said court to come in and defend the suit. The court, overruling her objections, subsequently rendered judgment against her as administratrix.</p> <p>Held, that the suit abated by the death of the defendant between the date of the decision and the entry of judgment, and before the expiration of the time within which a jury trial must bo claimed.</p> <p>IMd, further, that as the defendant had died there was no one against whom a judgment could be entered, and that the administratrix could not be summoned in as the time within which she could have claimed a jury trial had passed.</p>

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1897-02-11

How this case has been cited

Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently January 2007 · most notably Clark-Fitzpatrick, Inc./Franki Foundation Co. v. Gill (1994), City of Pawtucket v. Pawtucket Teachers' Alliance Local 930 (1958)

30 state decisions

80189719001910192019301940195019601970198019902000decided

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 →

Per Curiam.

¶1 We are of the opinion that the suit must be held to have aba,ted by the death of the defendant between the date of the decision and the date of the entry of judgment, and before the expiration of the time within which a jury trial must be claimed. When the date of the entry of judgment arrived, the defendant being dead, there was no one against whom j udgment could -be rendered ; and if the suit had been continued to await the appointment of an administrator, such administrator upon being • summoned in could not have claimed a jury trial, because the time for claiming such 'trial would have elapsed. We think the true view to be taken is that the suit abated by the defendant’s. death, as stated, and that the claim must be presented to the administrator.

¶2 Exception sustained, and case remitted to the District Court of the Eighth Judicial District.

/19/ri/704 · .json · Public domain