MENT    OUT    OF  CoURT,   StATINO    PrO*
CEBDINOS.]

1.  Notice  of  motion  was  given  for  the  pay-
ment of  money  into  court,  but  the  notice
did  not  proceed  to  state  that  an  applica-
tion would  be  made  for  its  investment;
one  of  the  parties  did  not  appear  on  the
motion.  Held,  that  no  order  for  invest-
ment of  the  fiind  could  be  made.  Ao6i»-
§on  V.  Wood,  voL  1,  p.  206

2.  The  proper  mode  of  obtaining  money
out  of  court  is  by  petition :  but  the  rights
of  the  parties  having  been  ascertained
by  arbitration,  and  no  decree  having
been  made,  the  Court  in  this  case  or-
dered payment  of  money  out  of  Court
upon  motion.     Olioer  v.  Burt.
vol.  1,  p.  688

3.  Where  a  Defendant  admits  by  his  answer
the  possession  of  documents,  and  a  ba-
1  .nee  of  money,  it  is  irregular  to  move  for
the  production  of  the  former,  and  pay-
ment into  Court  of  the  latter,  by  two
separate  motions.  They  ought  to  be  in-
cluded in  one.  In  this  case  the  Court
ordered  the  Plaintiff  to  pay  the  extra
costs  occasioned  by  this  irregular  pro-
ceeding.  Hawke  v.  Kemp,    vol.  3,  p.  288

4.  Notice  of  motion  given  en  beko^  ef  «
relator  in  an  information,  held  irregular  i
it  should  be  on  behalf  of  the  Attomey-
Genersl.  7*he  Attomeff^Qeneral  v.  Wrights

vol.  3,  p.  447
6.  On  a  motion  to  discharge  an  alleged
irregular  order,  no  parties  can  be  beard
in  support  of  the  application  but  those
who  have  joined  in  the  notice  of  motion
to  discharge  it.    Stmbbt  v.  Sargon*

V(M.  8,  p.  408


GENERAL  INDEX.
