Root v. O'Neil
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
ERROR to the Common Pleas of Carbon county. •Action in case, by O’Neil v. Root & Blay. The original narr. was in assumpsit, for goods, wares, and merchandise, sold and delivered. The case was arbitrated and award rendered for the plaintiff for $109.65, from which the defendants appealed.
Read the full summary
ERROR to the Common Pleas of Carbon county. •Action in case, by O’Neil v. Root & Blay. The original narr. was in assumpsit, for goods, wares, and merchandise, sold and delivered. The case was arbitrated and award rendered for the plaintiff for $109.65, from which the defendants appealed. Upon the trial, January, 1852, the plaintiff’s books were given in evidence; and then an offer was made, on his part, to prove that he had lent to the defendants $300, for which a note was received. This was objected to on part of defendants, because not declared for. Leave was then asked to file a new narr.,…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Black:, J.
When a plaintiff has stated his cause of action defectively, he may amend his declaration at any time before or during the trial. But his right of amending is not entirely without limit. The great cardinal rule adhered to in all the cases is, that the amendment must not introduce a cause of action substantially *327different from that wbicb is set forth in the narr. already filed. In the case now before ns the first declaration was indebitatus assumpsit for goods sold and delivered; and the additional counts, filed by leave of the Court, were for…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Erie City Iron Works v. BarberSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1888
- Borough v. KennedySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1910
- Good Roads Machinery Co. v. Old Lycoming TownshipSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1904
- Willing v. Provident Trust Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1937
- Hewitt v. Hodson, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Montgomery County1934