Robinson v. Erickson
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from WinnesheiTc District Oowrt. Plaintiffs appeal from the action of the court below, sustaining defendants’ motion to strike from the files their amended petition. They also com plain that there was error in rendering judgment for costs against them, as upon a trial, after sustaining said motion.
1Opinion of the CourtWright, J.
In sustaining the motion to strike, the court did not err. The amended petition contained no single averment material to the ascertainment or settlement of plaintiffs’ rights not found in the original. It was but the repetition of the former pleading. The fact that it was filed with leave of court makes no difference. The court does not ordinarily look into the contents of a proposed amended pleading when it is offered for filing. Neither, as a rule, has the opposite party any thing to do with such permission. When filed, it is subject to inspection, and its sufficiency or relevancy to attack.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- State ex rel. Floyd v. Mayor of KeokukSupreme Court of Iowa · 1865
3Cited by4 opinions
- Ray v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Florida · 1908
- Weimer v. LueckSupreme Court of Iowa · 1944
- Farris v. HayesOregon Supreme Court · 1880
- Hoyt v. BeachSupreme Court of Iowa · 1897