Payne v. Bilco Co.

On this appeal, plaintiff contends that the trial court erred in refusing to allow him to amend his complaint to conform to the proof and to dismiss the action as to the defendants Permanent, Som-merville, and Skobis. It should be pointed out that plaintiff’s oral motion to dismiss these three defendants was superfluous inasmuch as they had earlier been dismissed as parties by the court’s order of October 14, 1970, after plaintiff had settled his claim with them and given a release.

Plaintiff also contends that he should have been permitted to amend his complaint to reflect the fact that those…