McMonagle v. Nolan
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Petition for the enforcement of a lien upon the schooner Joy, under Gen. Sts. c. 151, for labor performed upon her. At the trial in the superior court, before Morton, J., it appeared that on the 8th of June 1864 the petitioner filed in the office of the clerk of the city of Boston the following statement signed by himself: “ I worked upon said vessel, as aforesaid, twenty-two days, from the twentieth day of January, a. d. 1864, to the fifteenth day of February, a. d. 1864,…
Read the full summary
Petition for the enforcement of a lien upon the schooner Joy, under Gen. Sts. c. 151, for labor performed upon her. At the trial in the superior court, before Morton, J., it appeared that on the 8th of June 1864 the petitioner filed in the office of the clerk of the city of Boston the following statement signed by himself: “ I worked upon said vessel, as aforesaid, twenty-two days, from the twentieth day of January, a. d. 1864, to the fifteenth day of February, a. d. 1864, at three dollars and fifty cents per day, $77.00. I have received from said George H. Green, in cash, $15.00. Balance…
1Opinion of the CourtFoster, J.
The statement filed by the petitioner conforms to the requirements of Gen. Sts. c. 151, § 13.
No objection to the sufficiency of the petition was taken by demurrer or answer. And the general objection at the hearing, which pointed out no particular defects, cannot be allowed to prevail. It is expressly provided in Gen. Sts. c. 151, § 17, that *322“ the court may at any time allow either party to amend his pleadings as in actions at common law.” Under this authority the amendment offered was properly allowed; and if any other objection to the petition had been specified, it might have been obviated…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Donnell v. StarlightMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1869
- Goulding v. SmithMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1874