McCullough v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Co.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 199, Oct. T., 1914, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. No. 3, Philadelphia Co., June T., 1907, No. 5903, discharging rule to amend in case of Peter McCullough v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Company. Rule to amend statement of claim.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 199, Oct. T., 1914, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. No. 3, Philadelphia Co., June T., 1907, No. 5903, discharging rule to amend in case of Peter McCullough v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Company. Rule to amend statement of claim. The petition for the rule to amend averred that “through a misunderstanding by counsel for the plain-, tiff, a statement of claim was filed alleging that the car in which plaintiff was riding collided with a car preceding it in the same direction on the said Chestnut street and that this error was not discovered until April 15, 1910, after the case had…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Head, J.,
The plaintiff brought this action of trespass on August 29, 1907. On the following September 4th he filed his statement with a rule to plead. On September 23d the plea was filed and the case put at issue. Thus the record stood until the case was called for trial in April, 1910, considerably more than two years after the cause of action arose. The plaintiff then moved for leave to amend his statement. Objection being made that the proposed amendment introduced a new cause of action which would be barred by the statute, the learned trial judge refused to permit it to be…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Martin v. Pittsburg Railways Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1909
- Mahoney v. Park Steel Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1907
3Cited by4 opinions
- Smith v. Piper Aircraft Corp.District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1955
- McKane v. City of PhiladelphiaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
- Romanowski Et Ux. v. MorgansteinSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
- Taylor v. Reading Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1958