Secor v. Witter
Ohio Supreme Court
Error. Reserved in the District Court of Lucas county. January 27, 1877, plaintiffs in error commenced an action against defendants in error, under the following caption: “ Peter F. Berdan, Maro Wheeler, John Berdan, and James Secor, late copartners as Secor; Berdan & Co., plaintiffs, v. Elbridge Gr.
Read the full summary
Error. Reserved in the District Court of Lucas county. January 27, 1877, plaintiffs in error commenced an action against defendants in error, under the following caption: “ Peter F. Berdan, Maro Wheeler, John Berdan, and James Secor, late copartners as Secor; Berdan & Co., plaintiffs, v. Elbridge Gr. Wetmore and Samuel B. Witter, John Wood, and David Robison Jr., copartners doing business in firm name of Witter, Robison & Wood; Chauneey E. Smith, J. C. Bruning’ and-'Bruning, copartners, doing business as Bruning Bros. defendants.” Witter, Robinson and Wood demurred on the ground that as to…
1Opinion of the Court
Johnson, O. J.
1. The objection raised to the amendment of the petition in error by striking out the name of Forman Waite, and, adding that of Peter F. Berdan as a co-plain tiff,: is not well taken. He was a co-plaintiff below, as one of the firm of Seer, Berdan & Go., who now seek a reversal. It is not denied but that his name was omitted by mistake. If the district court, or this court, cannot allow such a mistake to be corrected, in furtherance of justice, our reform system of pleading, in respect to its supposed superiority over the old system, is a delusion. But while this power to amend…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Osborn v. Bank of United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1824
- Delafield v. StateNew York Supreme Court · 1841
- Board of Education v. ScovilleSupreme Court of Kansas · 1874
- Matthews v. McSteaSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
- Junction Railroad v. CleneayIndiana Supreme Court · 1859
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.