Legal Opinion
Massachusetts Gasoline & Oil Co. v. Go-Gas Co.
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided May 27, 1929PublishedCited by 23 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtRugg, C.J.
The defendants have argued that the re-amended bill is not rightly before this court because its filing was not allowed by the Superior Court. The contention is sound that an amendment to a bill in equity cannot be filed after the parties are at issue unless and until its form and substance are brought to the attention of a judge and its filing allowed by him. That this must be so is apparent, not only because, by inherent necessity such amendments cannot become a matter of record as of right and can be filed only *126by order of court, in order that litigation may progress by orderly processes,…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Old Dominion Copper Mining & Smelting Co. v. BigelowMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1909
- Hanscom v. Malden & Melrose Gas Light Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
- Lowrie v. CastleMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1916
- Pizer v. HuntMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1925
- Clark v. New England Telephone & Telegraph Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1917
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- Peterson v. HopsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1940
- Keljikian v. Star Brewing Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1939
- Desmond v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1946
- Hill v. Trustees of Glenwood CemeteryMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1948
- Abbott v. BeanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1936
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.