Legal Opinion

Booth v. Hidden Inlet Canning Co.

District Court, D. Alaska

Decided August 19, 1926No. 849-KAPublished

1Opinion of the Court

REED, District Judge.

I do not think, from reading the third amended complaint, there is more than one cause of action alleged therein. It does not appear to me that there is a substantial change in the cause of action. The present complaint simply states in a different form what was sought to be stated in the original complaint. The true rule by which it may be determined whether a new cause of action is stated, or whether no substantial change has been made, is: Did the plaintiff so state his cause of action originally as to show he had a right to receive what he subsequently claimed ? In…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Cassinella v. AllenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914
  2. Miller v. ThompsonNevada Supreme Court · 1916

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

Powered by the Exa API