GRIFFITH v. BRONAUGH. 549

19th March, 1829.—BLAND, Chancellor.—It is a general rale
of this court, that the legal representatives of a deceased party
must be served with notice to revive the suit within a limited time
before the injunction can be dissolved.(c) But this rule must be
relaxed to meet the justice of the case, and accommodated to the
exigency of circumstances.(e) Where it was shewn, that the
legal representatives of the deceased were numerous, much dis-
persed, and not well known, and that it would be difficult, if not
impossible, to serve any order upon them; it was on motion
ordered, that unless the representatives of the complainant should
come in before the end of the next term and cause the suit to be
revived, the injunction should stand dissolved, (f) In the case
under consideration it appears, that the order could not be served
within the State; on consideration of which and the length of time
that has elapsed since the death of the late plaintiff, I deem this a
case in which it becomes necessary to depart from the general rule.

Whereupon it is, on motion of the defendant by his solicitor,
Ordered, that unless the said Luke Griffith, or some other legal
representative of the said late Samuel G. Griffith, to whom the
light belongs, shall come in before the end of the next term and
cause this suit to be revived, the said injunction heretofore granted
shall stand dissolved after that time.

Under this order the bill was on the 30th of September 1829
dismissed; but being soon after reinstated by consent, Luke Grif-
fith, the administrator, was admitted as plaintiff in place of his
intestate, and Bronaugh, the defendant, filed his answer, to which
the plaintiff put in a general replication, and a commission issued
to take testimony, which having been returned without any having
been taken, the case was set down for final hearing; and on the
18th of January it was decreed, that the injunction be perpetual.

(c) Duke of Chandos v. Talbot, Select Ca. Chan. 24.—(e) Eden. Inj. 40, 66;
1 Fow. Ex. Pra. 287.—(f) Carter v. Washington, 1 Hen. & Mun. 208; Kenner v.
Hord, 1 Hen. & Mun. 204.