Hoofstitler v. Hostetter
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 24, Oct. T., 1895,- by plaintiffs, from decree of C. P. No. 1, Allegheny County, Dec. T., 1890, No. 124, on bill in equity. Bill in equity to declare void an assignment of a secret recipe for the manufacture of Dr. J. Hostetter’s Stomach Bitters alleged to have been made by Jacob Hostetter to David Hostetfcer on February 17, 1858. The bill alleged that at the time the assignment was made Dr. Jacob Hostetter was an imbecile.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 24, Oct. T., 1895,- by plaintiffs, from decree of C. P. No. 1, Allegheny County, Dec. T., 1890, No. 124, on bill in equity. Bill in equity to declare void an assignment of a secret recipe for the manufacture of Dr. J. Hostetter’s Stomach Bitters alleged to have been made by Jacob Hostetter to David Hostetfcer on February 17, 1858. The bill alleged that at the time the assignment was made Dr. Jacob Hostetter was an imbecile. The bill was filed on September 23, 1890. Defendants filed their answer on November 25, 1890, and on April 11, 1891,. W. K. Jennings, Esq., was appointed…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
In view of the circumstances, the action of the court, in refusing plaintiffs’ application for leave to amend their bill, was free from error. The delay of several years in making the application was very great, and, moreover, it was not made until after the testimony on both sides was taken. It would be contrary to every recognized precedent to allow an amendment in such a case: Story’s Eq. Pl. sec. 887: 1 Dan. Ch. Pl. & Pr. 417; 1 Beach’s Eq. Pr. sec. 159; 6 Am. & Eng. Ency. of Law, 807.
For like reasons, the refusal of plaintiffs’ motion to strike from the record the masters’…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Berlin Smokeless Coal & Clay Co. v. RohmSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
- Pribek v. McGahan Et Ux.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
- Hale v. OwensbySupreme Court of Georgia · 1909