Legal Opinion

Cook v. Bee

Court of Appeals of Tennessee

Decided April 15, 1875Published

1Opinion of the Court

The Chancellor:

— The defendant Bee moved the court to be permitted to amend Ms answer so as to rely upon the statute of frauds as a defence. The court declined to entertain the motion unless accompanied with an affidavit showing a sufficient reason why the defence was not inserted in the original answer. Bowen v. Cross, 4 Johns. Ch. 375; Thomas v. Doub, 1 Md. 252; Graham v. Skinner, 4 Jones Eq. 94; McKim v. Thompson, 1 Bland, 150. The defendant’s solicitor thereupon filed his own affidavit. The affidavit required in such cases is obviously the affidavit of the defendant, although it may, if…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Cozine v. Graham & BleekerNew York Court of Chancery · 1830
  2. Smith v. BabcockU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1839
  3. Bowen v. CrossNew York Court of Chancery · 1820
  4. Thomas v. DoubCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1851
  5. Taylor v. DoddIndiana Supreme Court · 1854

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