Imparlance

emparlance. Literally, time to talk with the plaintiff; a continuance on the- judgment record, between the declaration and 'plea; time to plead in an action. Imparlances as timie to plead have not been recognized in American practice, and as continuances they have been expressly abolished in England.

In early practice, imparties to an action to answer the pleading of the other. It thus amounted to a continnance of the action to a further day. Literally the term signified leave given to the parties to talk together; i. e., witha view to settling their differences amicably, But in modern practice it denotes atime given to the defendant to plead. A general imparianee is the entry of a general prayer and allowaxce of tims to plead till the next term, without reserving to the defendant tha benefit of any exception; so that after such an impar lance the defendant cannot object to the jurisdic tion of the court, or plead any matter in abatement. This kind of imparlance is always from one term to another. A general special imparlance contains a saving of ai] exceptions whatsoever, so that the defendant after this may plead not only in abatement, but he may also plead a plea which affects the jurisdiction of the court, as privilege. He cannot, however, plead a tender, and that he was always ready to pay, because by craving time he admits that he is not ready, and so falsifies his plea. A special tmparlance reserves to the defendant all exceptions to the writ, bill, or count; and therefore afterit the defendant may plead in abatement, though not to the jurisdiction of thecourt. 1Tidd, Pr. 462, 408.

s Opportunity for a conference. 1. An indulgence granted a defendant to defer pleading to the action until a subsequent term. Trapnall, 10 How. 190 (1850); Hawthorne v. Calef, 2 Wall. 23 (1864); Gunn v. Barry, 15 id. 623 (1872); Walker V. Whitehead, 16 id. 318 (1872); Antoni v. Greenhow, l Or U. S. 774, 778 (1882); 101 id. 339. 'Koshkonong v. Burton, 104 U. S. 675 (1881), cases; Gilfi Uan v. Union Canal Go., 109 id. 401 (1883); Mitchell V. Clark, 110 id. 642 (1883). 2 Penniman's Case, 103 U. S. 717, 720 (1E80), cg.ses. ' gee also Kring v. Missouri, 107 U. S. 233 (1882), cases; Civil Rights Cases, 109 id. 12 (1883); Louisville, &c. R. Co. v. Palmes, ib. 256 (1883); Louisiana u. Mayor of New Orleans, tb. 285 (1883); Nelson v. St. Martin's Parish, 110 id. 720 (1884); Parker v. Buckner, 67 Tex. 2S (1886); 25 Am. Law Reg. 81-97 (1886), cases; 2 Story, Const. §§ 1368-91. • New Orleans Water-works Co. v. Louisiana Sugar (3o., 125 U. S. 18,. 30, 38 (1888), oases, Gray, J.; Kreiger Before the defendant puts in his defense he is entitled to demand one imparlance, or licentia loquendi, to see if he can end the matter amicably without further suit, by talking with the plaintiff; a practice supposed to have arisen in obedience to the precept " Agree with thine adversary quickly, whilst thou art in the way," Matt. v. 26. The Roman law of the Twelve Tables likewise directed the parties to make up the matter while going to the prsetor.' General imparlance. That just definedj and grantable of course. Special imparlance. Saved all exceptions to the writ or count, and was granted by the prothonotary. More special imparlance. Saved all exceptions whatsoever, and granted at the discretion of the court. 2 Imparlances are no longer recognized in this country, where, after appearance by the defendant, the cause stands continued until the end of the time within which the plea is to be filed. See Coktinuance. 2. Stay of execution. '

Leave given to the defendant to talk with the plaintiff and settle the suit amicably; an extension of time for pleading; a continuance; a stay of execution, v. Continuance.