Norris v. Denton
SAMUEL NORRIS v. SAMUEL H. DENTON
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Solomon Heydenfeldt (author)
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion — Heydenfeldt
Heydenfeldt, Justice A judgment was rendered in the District Court against the plaintiff and in favour of the defendant; and the former now files this bill to obtain from the latter a discovery in aid of his defence, on the ground that the defence is meritorious, and lies entirely within the knowledge of his judgment creditor. The action taken by the complainant comes too late. He ought to have filed his bill for discovery before judgment was rendered against him, and then his remedy would have been perfect, as he could also have enjoined the party suing him from proceeding in his suit until he had fully answered and made the discovery sought for.
While the law affords complete remedies to those who are diligent, it cannot level its rules to subserve the purposes of those who are guilty of negligence and delay.
The judgment is affirmed with costs.
Murray, Chief Justice.—I concur.
Cited by
- People v. Plyler Crim. No. 523. · 1899-10-23