Dieckerhoef v. Robertson
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York
This action was brought June 20, 1885, against the defendant to recover an alleged excess of duties exacted of plaintiffs by him as collector of customs. Thereafter the plaintiffs, under section 3012, Rev. St., served a bill of particulars of such duties claimed by them. Subsequently it was determined that the amounts of such duties claimed by them in the case of five importations was less than the real amounts exacted.
Read the full summary
This action was brought June 20, 1885, against the defendant to recover an alleged excess of duties exacted of plaintiffs by him as collector of customs. Thereafter the plaintiffs, under section 3012, Rev. St., served a bill of particulars of such duties claimed by them. Subsequently it was determined that the amounts of such duties claimed by them in the case of five importations was less than the real amounts exacted. They thereupon moved the court for permission to amend their bill of particulars by substituting the real amounts for the amounts claimed therein. The affidavit upon which…
1Opinion of the CourtLacombe, J.
This application, which is for leave to amend a bill of particulars in an action to recover excess of duties, may be best answered by quoting the decision of Judge Brown in Levi v. Robertson, (filed August 5, 1887.)
“ Under section 3012, an amendment of bill of particulars' may, I think, be made.as in any other case of reasonable excuse for a bona fide mistake. ' But the specific cause of error or mistake should be shown, and why the original was not made in proper form. The within affidavit is insufficient. If allowed, it would in effect abolish section 3012 in part.”
The, affidavit on which…
2Cited by1 opinion
- In re MaplesDistrict Court, D. Montana · 1901