
    William B. Lawrence v. David P. Hall.
    Exceptions to an answer in Equity cannot be filed witll effect after the period prescribed in tlio Court’s rules, unless by leave of Court, upon motion.
    IN Equity. — In June, 1851, the complainant filed his bill, which the defendant answered, as required by rule. To the answer the complainant neither replied nor excepted until September 1854, when, without notice to the Court, he lodged with the Cleric certain exceptions. Of these, thus filed, the defendant refused to take cognizance, and at the March term, 1855, complainant moved for a hearing upon them. The defendant objecting to the motion, its consideration was postponed to this term.
    
      Sheffield and Potter for the defendant,
    contend that in fact no exceptions are on file in the case ; insisting that under the Court’s rules 10 and 11, (1 R. I. 20) a complainant is bound within two months after the filing of an answer, to file either a replication or exceptions, and that after the expiration of that term he can file neither without express permission of the Court, upon motion regularly made.
    
      Ames for complainant, contra.
   The Couet

held, as the true construction of their rules, that after the expiration of the prescribed period for the filing of answers, replications and exceptions, such papers cannot be filed with effect, without express leave of the Court upon motion heard. The Court had, however, a discretionary power, which they would exercise in behalf of the complainant in this case, by granting permission to file exceptions to defendant’s answer, as of the day of this hearing.  