Bowman v. De Peyster
New York Court of Common Pleas
. Appeal by tbe plaintiff, from an order of the special term, allowing the defendant to amend his answer on terms. This, action was commenced the 10th October^ 1859, to recover an alleged balance owing for professional services, rendered by the plaintiff in conducting a suit, in the Supreme Court, for De Peyster & Wilmarth agst. the Sun Mutual Insurance Company. The defendant is the assignee of the firm of De Peyster & Wilmarth.
Read the full summary
. Appeal by tbe plaintiff, from an order of the special term, allowing the defendant to amend his answer on terms. This, action was commenced the 10th October^ 1859, to recover an alleged balance owing for professional services, rendered by the plaintiff in conducting a suit, in the Supreme Court, for De Peyster & Wilmarth agst. the Sun Mutual Insurance Company. The defendant is the assignee of the firm of De Peyster & Wilmarth. The defendant’s answer alleged payment to the plaintiff to the full value of his services, and denied any balance owing. The cause was referred, by consent, to George…
1Opinion of the Court
Br the Court.—Daly, F. J.
If the question were now to be passed upon for the first time, I should hold that an order of the judge, at special term, allowing a defendant to amend his answer by setting up an additional defense, was not reviewable upon appeal. At the common law, the amendment of a pleading was in the discretion of the court, and the allowance or the refusal by the court below of an amendment was not a matter which could be reviewed as error (Hart v. Seixas, 21 Wend. 51; Cooper v. Bissell, 15 Johns. 319 ; Travis v. Waters, 12 Id. 506; Clason v. Shotwell, Id. 31; Chichester v.…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Bank of United States v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1826
- Hart v. SeixasNew York Supreme Court · 1839
- Mandeville and Jamesson v. WilsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1809
- Harrington v. SladeNew York Supreme Court · 1856
- Coles v. ColesNew York Supreme Court · 1818
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Chittenango Cotton Co. v. StewartNew York Supreme Court · 1873
- Livermore v. BainbridgeNew York Supreme Court · 1873
- McLean v. St. Paul & Chicago Ry. Co.New York Court of Common Pleas · 1886
- Schreyer v. Mayor of New YorkThe Superior Court of New York City · 1875