Administrator of Bell v. Hall
New Jersey Court of Chancery
The case made by the bill is this. In March, 1840, Henry B. Stoll and Edward S. Bell entered into partnership as merchants, at Stanhope, under the name of Stoll and Bell, and bought a stock of goods from Andrew A. Smalley, of that place, and gave to Smalley their notes for the price; one of which he assigned to Coursen and Woodruff, of New-York.
Read the full summary
The case made by the bill is this. In March, 1840, Henry B. Stoll and Edward S. Bell entered into partnership as merchants, at Stanhope, under the name of Stoll and Bell, and bought a stock of goods from Andrew A. Smalley, of that place, and gave to Smalley their notes for the price; one of which he assigned to Coursen and Woodruff, of New-York. In March, 1841, the partnership of Stoll and Bell was dissolved, by mutual consent, by an agreement in writing, by which,, among other things, it Was agreed, that Stoll should take the stock of goods on hand and the accounts and the effects of the…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
By the present practice in England, an amendment of an answer is not permitted; leave must be obtained to file a supplemental answer. 1 am not aware that this rule has been adopted in this court. But, whether the application is for leave to amend the answer, or for leave to file a supplemental answer; if the allegation proposed to be super-added is material, and prejudicial to the complainant, and the application is not made until after depositions have been taken, it should be listened to with distrust. It is an application to the discretion of the court. An omission by plain…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Bristol-Myers Co. v. L. Bamberger Co.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1939