Gale v. French
Superior Court of New Hampshire
In this action the plaintiff in review moved the court for leave to amend the writ of review in a matter of form, which motion was granted. Upon that ground, and upon the further ground of the entire irresponsibility of the plaintiff to respond the costs of the action, the defendant moved the court to order the plaintiff to furnish security to respond the costs, under sec. 7, chap. 191, of the Revised Statutes.
Read the full summary
In this action the plaintiff in review moved the court for leave to amend the writ of review in a matter of form, which motion was granted. Upon that ground, and upon the further ground of the entire irresponsibility of the plaintiff to respond the costs of the action, the defendant moved the court to order the plaintiff to furnish security to respond the costs, under sec. 7, chap. 191, of the Revised Statutes. No change has taken place in the plaintiff’s circumstances since the commencement of the original action. The court granted the motion, to which the plaintiff excepted. It was ordered…
1Opinion of the CourtWoods, J.
Rev. Stat., chap. 186, sec. 10, provide that no writ, declaration, or other proceeding, shall be abated or quashed by reason of any formal error, and authorize the court to order amendments upon motion. The following section authorizes the court to permit amendments in matters of substance, upon just and reasonable terms. The necessary and established construction of the two sections is, that terms can not be imposed for the first named class of amendments. The court below therefore had not a discretion to require the plaintiff 'in review to furnish security for costs as a condition of…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Gerace v. BentleySuperior Court of The Virgin Islands · 2015
- LaPlante v. Iafolla Construction Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1971