Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

37 S.C.L. 60

Perry v. Aiken

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Decided August 15, 1846

Court of Appeals of South Carolina · decided 1846-08-15

<p>The plaintiffs issued their writ returnable to Spring Term, 1845, and at fall .term of the same year, obtained an order for further time to declare. At Spring Term, 1846, no declaration having been filed within the period limited by the previous order, the plaintiffs applied for, and obtained, an order far yet further time to declare. Held, on appeal, that the court had power to grant the last order.</p> <p>Every order entered in a cause is such a continuance of it, that the party cannot be held to have let fall his action, until a year and a day has expired from the entry of the order.</p>

Decided 1846-08-15

¶1 Curia,-per

Frost, J.

¶2A cause is not necessarily out of court, because the plaintiff has not declared within a year and a day from the return of the writ; because, if unprepared, he may obtain rules for further time to declare, indefinitely. These rules do, generally, extend the time for declaring' beyond a year and a day from the return. The necessity of declaring within a prescribed time, affects only the party, and does not abridge the authority of the court to control and direct its proceedings as may be most conducive to justice. Every order entered in a cause, is such a continuance of it, that the party cannot be held to have let fall his action, until a year and a day has expired from the date of the entry, Within this period, it is in the discretion of the judge to grant further time to declare. The point was ruled in So. W. Rail Road Bank vs. Dupont, decided on appeal from Charleston, Spring Term, 1843. The motion is refused.

Richardson, O’Neall, Evans, Butler and Ward-law, JJ. concurred.
/37/scl/60 · .json · Public domain