Legal Opinion

Charles Nelson Co. v. United States

District Court, W.D. Washington

Decided April 2, 1926No. 8687PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

NETERER, District Judge.

Plaintiff’s . recovery must rest upon its 'right at the inception of the suit. Hollingsworth v. Flint, 101 U. S. 591, 25 L. Ed. 1028; American Bonding & Trust Co. v. Gibson County, 145 F. 871, 76 C. C. A. 155, 7 Ann. Cas. 522. Under section 954, R. S. (Comp. St. § 1591), courts have wide discretion in permitting amendments, and an amendment relates back to the time of the commencement of the action. Union Pacific Railway Co. v. Wyler, 15 S. Ct. 877,158 U. S. 285, 39 L. Ed. 983. Amendments are allowable in admiralty, even in matters of substance, with due -consideration…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Union Pacific Railway Co. v. WylerSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
  2. American Bonding & Trust Co. v. Gibson CountyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1906
  3. Hollingsworth v. FlintSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
  4. The Imogene M. TerryDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1884
  5. Edmunds v. Illinois Cent. R.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern Iowa · 1897

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Rosecrans v. William S. Lozier, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1944
  2. Hill v. United StatesDistrict Court, N.D. Texas · 1947
  3. Rhodes v. United StatesDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1934
  4. Ozanic v. United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1949
  5. Czarnikow Rionda Co. v. Ellerman & Bucknall S. S. Co.District Court, E.D. New York · 1934

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API