Legal Opinion

Bennington Iron Co. v. Campbell

New York Court of Chancery

Decided April 6, 1830PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Exceptions were filed to the separate answers of the several defendants in this cause' for insufficiency ; which exceptions, on reference, were allowed by the master. The complainants then odtained an order for leave to amend their bill, and that the defendants answer the amendments and exceptions together.

Read the full summary

Exceptions were filed to the separate answers of the several defendants in this cause' for insufficiency ; which exceptions, on reference, were allowed by the master. The complainants then odtained an order for leave to amend their bill, and that the defendants answer the amendments and exceptions together. The amendments to the original bill on file- were made in the usual manner: by attaching, the amendments to the bill, making slight alterations therein in red ink, and by making references thereon in the same manner, shewing where the amendments attached were to come in or to be inserted.…

1Opinion of the Court

The Chancellor.

There have been some irregularities on both sides, in this case, which it may be proper to notice in order to do justice between the parties. The manner in which amendments are to be made is stated by chancellor Kent in Luce v. Graham, 4 (John. Ch. Rep. 172.) If a party thinks proper to file or serve an entire new.bill, incorporating the original matter with the amendments, he must distinctly mark and designate the amendments, so that the defendant and the court may see what they are. And where a solicitor unnecessarily makes a re-engrossment or a full copy of the original…

2Cited by3 opinions

  1. Ames v. Lake Superior & Mississippi RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1875
  2. Henry v. FineSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1861
  3. Knoch v. FunkeThe Superior Court of New York City · 1891

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API