General
Rapp versus Elliot
2 U.S. 1842 Dall. 184·Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·1792·PA
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Rapp versus Elliot.
THE defendant had pleaded in abatement, that the plaintiff was a feme covert: And now Howell, for the plaintiff, moved to strike off the plea, not being supported by any affidavit, as the rules of the Court require. Todd contended that he could file the affidavit instanter, if the Court should deem it necessary in this case ; but Howell said it was too late, and that a dilatory plea could not be recurred to, at this stage of the proceedings.
[MAJORITY — By the Court :]
By the Court :
—As the plea is not supported by any affidavit, it cannot be sustained ; and we think it is too late to file a new one. The defendant must, therefore, plead in chief; or the plaintiff will be at liberty to sign judgment.