Skip to main content
Supreme Court of Canada· 1895

Foran v. Handley

(1895) 24 SCR 706
GeneralJD
Cite or share
Share via WhatsAppEmail
Showing the official court-reporter headnote. An editorial brief (facts · issues · held · ratio · significance) is on the roadmap for this case. The judgment text below is the authoritative source.

Court headnote

Foran v. Handley Collection Supreme Court Judgments Date 1895-03-13 Report (1895) 24 SCR 706 Judges Gwynne, John Wellington; King, George Edwin; Sedgewick, Robert; Strong, Samuel Henry; Taschereau, Henri-Elzéar On appeal from Ontario Subjects Appeal Decision Content Supreme Court of Canada Foran v. Handley, (1895) 24 SCR 706 Date: 1895-03-13 Foran v. Handley 1895: Mar. 13. Present:—Sir Henry Strong C.J., and Taschereau, Gwynne, Sedgewick and King JJ. Appeal—Dismissed for want of appearance—Application to reinstate. Motion to reinstate appeal which had been dismissed because no counsel had appeared for appellant when the case was called. The only ground stated for asking the indulgence of the court was that counsel had been present not long before the case was called and had felt satisfied that it would not be reached that day, but that the cases before it had been unexpectedly disposed of. The court refused to reinstate the appeal. Motion refused with costs Ritchie for the motion. Orde contra. …

Read full judgment
Foran v. Handley
Collection
Supreme Court Judgments
Date
1895-03-13
Report
(1895) 24 SCR 706
Judges
Gwynne, John Wellington; King, George Edwin; Sedgewick, Robert; Strong, Samuel Henry; Taschereau, Henri-Elzéar
On appeal from
Ontario
Subjects
Appeal
Decision Content
Supreme Court of Canada
Foran v. Handley, (1895) 24 SCR 706
Date: 1895-03-13
Foran v. Handley
1895: Mar. 13.
Present:—Sir Henry Strong C.J., and Taschereau, Gwynne, Sedgewick and King JJ.
Appeal—Dismissed for want of appearance—Application to reinstate.
Motion to reinstate appeal which had been dismissed because no counsel had appeared for appellant when the case was called.
The only ground stated for asking the indulgence of the court was that counsel had been present not long before the case was called and had felt satisfied that it would not be reached that day, but that the cases before it had been unexpectedly disposed of.
The court refused to reinstate the appeal.
Motion refused with costs
Ritchie for the motion.
Orde contra.

Source: decisions.scc-csc.ca

Related cases