¶1held, that the testimony very clearly established the truth of the plea at the time it was filed, and the issue was to be considered as referring to that period. It appeared, that the judgments had been discharged, and satisfied subsequent to that period. It was thereupon ordered, that the plaintiffs, within thirty days, pay the costs of the plea, and of all subsequent proceedings, or that the hill *167stand dismissed, with costs; and that if the costs were so paid, that the defendants should then answer the bill, within six weeks, or that the bill he taken pro confesso against them.
4 Johns. Ch. 166
Cook v. Mancius
Decided October 16, 1819
New York Court of Chancery · decided 1819-10-16
THE defendants pleaded in bar certain outstanding judgments, and that those creditors ought to have been made parties to the suit. The plaintiffs, instead of amending their bill, by making those creditors parties, upon the terms directed by the Chancellor, (vide S. C. v. 3. p. 427.) traversed the plea, by replying and taking issue upon it, and putting the defendant to prove it. The cause came on to be heard upon the proofs taken under that issue.
Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently May 1886
2 state decisions
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1819-10-16
View the full empirical analysis of this case →