¶1The defendant has prevented; the writ of error from being regularly prosecuted, and cannot now be permitted to profit by his own wrong. The judgment of affirmance is therefore denied, and the plaintiff has leave to discontinue his writ of error.
3 Stew. 53
Mitchell v. Russell
Decided July 15, 1830
Supreme Court of Alabama · decided 1830-07-15
Whit of error, from Marengo Circuit Court. The defendant in error, moved for ajudgment of affir-mance on certificate, against which the plaintiff shewed cause and asked leave to dismiss his writ of error, with a view to prosecute another; he made known to the Court by affidavit, that “shortly before the meeting of the Court,” to which the writ of error was returnable, “Russell informed the affiant, who is attornej^ of the plaintiff, that said cause had been compromised…
Decided 1830-07-15