Pittsburgh, Cincinnati & St. Louis Railway Co. v. Martin
Indiana Supreme Court
From the Howard Circuit Court.
1Opinion of the Court
Bicknell, C. C.
This was a suit, by the appellee against the appellant, to recover damages for a collision.
The plaintiff recovered sis hundred dollars; the defendant appealed.
The first error assigned by the appellant is, that the court refused to strike out the amended complaint. The complaint had been amended by substituting Henry Martin for John Martin as plaintiff; this was done before the complaint was answered and without obtaining leave of court therefor.
Amendments, made after answer, require leave of court, but any pleading may be amended, of course, before it is answered. Civil Code,…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Continental Improvement Co. v. SteadSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Ernst v. . Hudson River Railroad Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1866
- Ohio & Mississippi Railway Co. v. SelbyIndiana Supreme Court · 1874
- Bellefontaine Railway Co. v. HunterIndiana Supreme Court · 1870
- Ernst v. . Hudson River Railroad Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1868
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by55 opinions
- Cincinnati, Hamilton & Indianapolis Railroad v. ButlerIndiana Supreme Court · 1885
- Cincinnati, Indianapolis, St. Louis & Chicago Railway Co. v. GramesIndiana Supreme Court · 1893
- Malott v. HawkinsIndiana Supreme Court · 1902
- Mann v. Belt Railroad & Stock Yard Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1891
- Cleveland, Cincinnati, Columbus & Indianapolis Railway Co. v. HarringtonIndiana Supreme Court · 1892
50 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.