CASES DECIDED

IN THE

HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY

OF

MARYLAND.

WALSH v. SMYTH 9
INJUNCTION.—CHANCERY PRACTICE.—AMENDMENT OF BILL.—REHEARING.

No injunction can be granted to stay proceedings at law between the same
parties, without bond and surety, by the plaintiff in equity to the plain-
tiff at law. to prosecute the suit in equity with effect, (a)

Where the suit abates by the death of the plaintiff, the injunction not being
thereby dissolved, a dissolution can only be obtained by notice to the
representatives of the deceased; or, if they are non-residents, or un-
known, by notice entered on the docket: or in a course of proceeding
between the surviving parties, the suit not having been noticed for some
time by the representatives of the deceased.

Where in pursuance of a contract for the sale of land, several bonds were
given for the payment of the purchase money, they were regarded as
one contract: and the consideration, on being impeached, having been
sustained in favor of a responding defendant, it was held, to enure to
the benefit of a defendant against whom, for not answering on warning
by publication, the bill might have been taken pro confesso.

But although as regards an inseparably joint cause of suit, a good defence
by one defendant must enure to the benefit of all; yet, as regards plain-
tiffs, where there is a ground of relief available for all, the neglect of
any one to take advantage of it, will not prevent any others of them
from benefiting by it.

The nature of an amended bill; how leave to amend may be obtained; and
in what manner the amendment should be made, (b)

On an application for a rehearing, it is not enough to shew that injustice has
been done, but that it has been done under circumstances which authorize
the Court to interfere.

(a) See Salmon v. Clagett, post, 135.

(b) Cited in French v. Hay, 22 Wallace, 246.
1 3 B.