Woolson Spice Co. v. Columbia Trust Co.
New York Supreme Court
Motion by the defendant Nielsen to compel- the plaintiff to accept an amended answer, or, in the alternative, for leave to amend in accordance with the said amended answer.
1Opinion of the CourtGiegerich, J.
The defendant Nielsen moves to compel the plaintiff to accept an amended answer or, in the alternative, for leave to amend in accordance with the said amended answer. After the time of the defendant Nielsen to amend his answer had expired he applied to the court and obtained leave to amend, and pursuant to such leave he served an amended answer. Within twenty days thereafter he served a second amended answer, which was returned by the plaintiff’s attorneys upon the ground that its service was unauthorized, and that no leave of court to serve the same had been obtained. Thereupon the said…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Backes v. Mechanics & Traders' BankAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1909
- Frank v. BushNew York City Court · 1882
- Hall v. Galban & Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1914
- Low v. GraydonNew York Supreme Court · 1862
- O'Connell v. WilsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1914
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- City of Yonkers v. MooreAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1932