Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

3 S.C.L. 203

Kennedy v. Smith

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided January 15, 1803

Supreme Court of South Carolina · decided 1803-01-15

The plaintiff sued out the writ in 1793. In 1802, no declaration having been filed, the plaintiff moved for leave to declare, having previously given a term’s notice to the defendant of the motion. The motion was overruled in Charleston district. The object of the motion in this court was to obtain what was denied by .J ,. , .... 1 the district couit on the motion in that court.

Decided 1803-01-15

Per curiam.

¶1By the general rules of law, the plaintiff is bound to declare within twelve months ; and a declaration on the writ af. terwards, is the same as if there was no writ. In England, the plaintiff must declare within two terms, or give a term’s notice. 3 Bl. Com. 290 Our act requires the declaration to be filed bofore the second court after the return of the writ. The act is directory, and the plaintiff may he ruled to declare within that time; but if he is not, he may declare afterwards, within a year from the return of the writ, but he must give, a term’s no-*205(ice. The case from Cromp. relates to proceedings after issue joined.

¶2Motion overruled.

/3/scl/203 · .json · Public domain