
    [636] HALSEY against WHITLOCK
    Summons'must be returned before an adjournment.
    In this case, it appeared by the record, that on the return day of the summons, the justice was necessarily called from home; that before his departure, and before the return of the summons, or the appearance of either party, he adjourned the cause to a future day.
    
      
      Mr. Halsey
    
    moved for the reversal of the judgment of the justice, on the ground that the justice tried the cause, and rendered judgment for the plaintiff below, in the absence of the defendant, on the day to which the cause had been so adjourned. He contended, that a cause could not be adjourned before it was in court, by the return of the summons, and the appearance of the parties.
   By the Court.

This proceeding cannot be supported. A cause cannot be continued in this way; before an adjournment can take place, the summons must be returned, and the parties in court, or at least, the plaintiff must appear.

Judgment reversed.

Cited in Nicholson v. Wright, l Harr. 232; Taylor v. Doremus, 1 Harr. 473; Woodward v. Woolverton; 4 Zab. 419.  