Cooper v. Bissell
New York Supreme Court
STORKS moved for leave to eater a nolle prosequi as to . otie count, on an affidavit stating that this was a writ of error to the Oneida court of common pleas ; that the declaration contained two counts, one in trover, and the other in trespass, for talcing a horse; that the verdict was general, and that the evidence applied to either count; that an applicatian had been made to the court below to amend the ver¿[ict, by applying it to one count, and for leave to enter a > J…
Read the full summary
STORKS moved for leave to eater a nolle prosequi as to . otie count, on an affidavit stating that this was a writ of error to the Oneida court of common pleas ; that the declaration contained two counts, one in trover, and the other in trespass, for talcing a horse; that the verdict was general, and that the evidence applied to either count; that an applicatian had been made to the court below to amend the ver¿[ict, by applying it to one count, and for leave to enter a > J rr J o ’ . nolle prosequi as to the other, which motion bad been refused. He contended, that the court of errors had a…
1Per curiam
There are several insuperable objections to the motion.
When one count in a declaration is good, and the others bad, if the judge will certify that the evidence applied solely to that count, or that all the evidence given would properly apply to that count as well as the others, the verdict may he amended by applying it to the good count; and if the evidence did not particularly apply to the bad count, the verdict may also be amended. (1 Caines' Rep. 381. 1 Johns. Rep. 505.)
Admitting that one of the counts here is bad, on account of the misjoinder, the amendment can only be made in the court…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Caylat v. Houston East & West Texas Railway Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1923
- Rockfeller v. DonnellyCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1826
- Burhans v. TibbitsNew York Supreme Court · 1851
- Farrand v. BentleyMichigan Supreme Court · 1859
- Rowell v. BruceSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1831
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.