Miller v. Ralston

By the Court. It appears by the record that the action was brought before the debt was due, which is manifest •error. ■ The judgment must therefore be reversed. Mr. Hopkins then moved for a venire facias de novo, which the Court refused, because there was no error in the course of the trial, but it appeared from the plaintiff’s own averment that there was no cause of action at the time the suit was commenced. Judgment reversed.