OF PROCESS. That part of the bill which asks that the defendant may be compelled to appear and answer the bill, and abide the determination of the court upon the subject.
It must contain the names of all the par ties; 1 P. Wms. 593 ; Brasher's Ex'rs v. Van Cortlandt, 2 Johns. Ch. (N. Y.) 245; Coop. Eq. P1. 16; Bisph. Eq. § 9; although they are out of the jurisdiction; 1 Beay. 106; Mitt Eq. Pl. 164. The ordinary process asked for is a writ of subpoena ; Story, Eq. Pl. § 44 ; and in case a distringas against a corporation; Coop. Eq. Pl. 16; or an injunc tion ; 2 S. & S. 219; 1 Sim. 50 ; is sought for, it should be included in the prayer.
Under the supreme court equity rule 25 (.February, 1913) the prayer for special re lief only is provided for and it may be in the alternhtive; 198 Fed. xxv.
FOR El.m.rEF, is general., which asks for such relief as the court may grant; or spe cial, which states the particular form of re lief desired. A special prayer is generally inserted, followed by a general prayer, Madd. 408; Hobson v. McArthur, 16 Pet. (U. S.) 195, 10 L. Ed. 930; Danforth v. Smith, 23 Vt. 247; Spivey v. Frazee, 7 Ind. 661; Kelly's Heirs v. McGuire, 15 Ark. 555; a general prayer if omitted, may be added by amendment or amended bill; McCrum v. Lee, 38 W. Va. 583, 18 S. E. 757. Unless the general prayer is added, if the defendant fails in his special prayer he will not be en titled to any relief ; 1 Ves. 426; Mt. Vernon Bank v. Stone, 2 R. I. 129, 57 Am. Dec. 709; except in case of charities and bills in be half of infants; 18 Ares. 325; Colton v. Ross, 2 Paige, Ch. (N. Y.) 396, 22 Am. Dec. 648.
A general prayer is sufficient for most purposes ; and the special relief desired may be prayed for at bar ; 4 Madd. 408; Story, Eq. Pl. § 41; Busby v. Littlefield, 31 N. H. 193; Tayloe v. Ins. Co., 9 How. (U. S.) 390, 13 L. Ed. 187; Holmes v. Fresh, 9 Mo. 201; Shields v. Trammell, 19 Ark. 62; Kelly v. Payne, 18 Ala. 371; Danforth v.
Smith, 23 Vt. 247; but where a special or der and provisional process are, required, founded on peculiar circumstances, a special prayer therefor is generally inserted; 6 Madd. 218; Eastman v. Ramsey, 3 Ind. 419. A prayer for general relief is sufficient to support any decree warranted by the al legations of the bill ; Walker v. Converse, 148 M. 622, 36 N. E. 202 ; but under such a prayer a party cannot recover a claim dis tinct from that demanded by the bill; Pick ens v. Knisely, 29 W. Va. 1, 11 S. B. 932, 6 Am. St. Rep. 622.
Such relief, and such only, will be grant ed, either under a special prayer, whether at bar ; 2 Ves. 299 ; Walker v. Devereau, 4 Paige, Ch. (N. Y.) 229; Scudder v. Young, 25 Me. 153; Cameron v. Abbott, 30 Ala. 416; or in the bill; Denison v. League, 16 Tex. 399 ; Miller v. Saunders, 18 Ga. 492; Dela ware & H. C. Co. v. Coal Co., 21 Pa. 131; or under a general prayer, as the case as stat ed will justify ; Melvin v. Robinson, 42 N. C. 80; Cook v. Bronaugh, 13 Ark. 183; Tay loe v. Ins. Co., 9 How. (U. S.) 390, 13 L. Ed. 187; and a bill framed apparently for one purpose will not be allowed to accomplish another, to the injury of the defendant; Denison v. League, 16 Tex. 399; Livingston's Ex'rs v. Van Rensselaer's Adm'rs, 6 Wend. (N. Y.) 63.
And, generally, the decree must conform to the allegations and proof ; Crocket v. Lee, 7 Wheat. (U. S.) 522, 5 L. Ed. 513; Stuart v. Bank, 19 Johns. (N. Y.) 496; Langdon v. Roane's Adm'r, 6 Ala. 518, 41 Am. Dec. 60; Beers v. Botsford, 13 Conn. 146. But a spe cial prayer may be disregarded, if the al legations warrant relief under the general prayer; Kelly's Heirs v. McGuire, 15 Ark. 555; May v. Lewis, 22 Ala. 646; the relief granted must be consistent with the special prayer; Simmons v. Williams, 27 Ala. 507 ; Delaware & H. C. Co. v. Coal Co., 21 Pa. 131; Ruff v. Summers, 4 Des. Eq. (S. C.) 530; Wilkin v. Wilkin, 1 Johns. Ch. (N. Y.) 111.