Johnson v. Hardware Mutual Casualty Co.
Supreme Court of Vermont
1Opinion of the CourtPowers, C. J.
When the case was reversed and remanded by this Court, Johnson v. Hardware Mut. Casualty Co., 108 Vt. 269, 288, 187 Atl. 788, the rescript contained the following provision: “* * * with leave to apply for an amendment if plaintiff be so advised.” This being so, it did not stand in the county court like the ordinary ease remanded by us. Strictly taken the first step to be taken by the plaintiff in that court, was to apply for and obtain leave to amend the complaint; and until that was done, the case was not for trial. The plaintiff did not take this view of it. He considered that the case was…
Also in this document: Dissent.
2Cases cited45 opinions
- Hilker v. Western Automobile InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1931
- City of Wakefield v. Globe Indemnity Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1929
- Woodhouse v. Woodhouse Et Ux.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1925
- Higgins, Admr. v. MetzgerSupreme Court of Vermont · 1928
- Platt v. ShieldsSupreme Court of Vermont · 1923
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by54 opinions
- Southern Fire & Casualty Co. v. NorrisCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1952
- Truck Insurance Exchange v. Prairie Framing, LLCMissouri Court of Appeals · 2005
- Zumwalt v. Utilities InsuranceSupreme Court of Missouri · 1950
- Henke v. Iowa Home Mutual Casualty CompanySupreme Court of Iowa · 1959
- Dumas v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1971
49 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.