Murray v. Mattison
Supreme Court of Vermont
Trespass for an assault upon one Rose Murray. The suit was brought in the name of the said Rose and her husband, John Murray. The plaintiff moved to amend the writ by striking out the name of John Murray. Heard upon this motion at the December term, 1890, Taft, J., presiding. The motion was allowed and the defendants excepted. The suit was returnable to the June term, 1890. The motion was made at the following December term.
Read the full summary
Trespass for an assault upon one Rose Murray. The suit was brought in the name of the said Rose and her husband, John Murray. The plaintiff moved to amend the writ by striking out the name of John Murray. Heard upon this motion at the December term, 1890, Taft, J., presiding. The motion was allowed and the defendants excepted. The suit was returnable to the June term, 1890. The motion was made at the following December term. No. 25, Acts of 1890 was approved Nov. 26, 1890. The statute under which the amendment was granted was not enacted until after the bringing of this suit. Hence it could…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
ROWELL, J.
No. 25, St. of 1890, empowers courts to amend civil process by “ striking out the name of a party improperly joined as a plaintiff.” No. 31 of the same St., passed the same day, provides that no act of the General Assembly shall affect a suit begun or pending at the time of its passage, but declares that the act shall not apply to acts regulating practice in the courts, nor relating to the amendment of process or. pleading as to parties or otherwise. The former act is remedial and salutary. Its language is broad enough to cover suits pending…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Hine v. PomeroySupreme Court of Vermont · 1867
- People ex rel. Israel v. TibbetsNew York Supreme Court · 1825
3Cited by16 opinions
- Myott v. MyottSupreme Court of Vermont · 1988
- Mattison v. PoulenSupreme Court of Vermont · 1976
- In re T. L. S.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1984
- Daniels v. Detroit, Grand Haven & Milwaukee Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1910
- Sanz v. Douglas Collins ConstructionSupreme Court of Vermont · 2006
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.