RESPUBLICA v. MATLACK, 2 U.S. 108 (1790)
U.S. Supreme Court
RESPUBLICA v. MATLACK, 2 U.S. 108 (1790)
2 U.S. 108 (Dall.)
Respublica
v.
Matlack
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
June Term, 1790
Appeal from the settlement of the defendant's accounts by the Comptroller General. The defendant had been appointed a commissioner by the Executive Council, to explore the navigable waters of the state; and on account of his absence upon that service, Lewis had moved, at the preceding term, and now moved again, to postpone the trial. The Attorney General observed, that the appellant was not in duress, and might, if
he pleased, attend. If, therefore, the cause was put off at this time, he hoped at least, a peremptory rule for trial at the next term would be entered.
By the Court: It would wear an aspect of hardship, if the trial were to be forced on, at the very time that the plaintiff had engaged the defendant in his service, and sent him to a distance. But let a peremptory rule for trial at the next term be entered.
U.S. Supreme Court
RESPUBLICA v. MATLACK, 2 U.S. 108 (1790)
2 U.S. 108 (Dall.)
Respublica
v.
Matlack
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
June Term, 1790
Appeal from the settlement of the defendant's accounts by the Comptroller General. The defendant had been appointed a commissioner by the Executive Council, to explore the navigable waters of the state; and on account of his absence upon that service, Lewis had moved, at the preceding term, and now moved again, to postpone the trial. The Attorney General observed, that the appellant was not in duress, and might, if
Page 2 U.S. 108, 109
he pleased, attend. If, therefore, the cause was put off at this time, he hoped at least, a peremptory rule for trial at the next term would be entered.
By the Court: It would wear an aspect of hardship, if the trial were to be forced on, at the very time that the plaintiff had engaged the defendant in his service, and sent him to a distance. But let a peremptory rule for trial at the next term be entered.
Justia Annotations is a forum for attorneys to summarize, comment on, and analyze case law published on our site. Justia makes no guarantees or warranties that the annotations are accurate or reflect the current state of law, and no annotation is intended to be, nor should it be construed as, legal advice. Contacting Justia or any attorney through this site, via web form, email, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship.