Cocks v. Radford
New York Supreme Court
Motion for leave to amend the answers in two actions between the same parties, and for certain other relief. These actions were brought to compel an accounting from defendants of the amount received by them for the insurance of the steamboat “ Arrow,” which was destroyed by fire, and for the earnings of, and disbursements and expenses made and incurred upon, the “Thomas E. Hulse” and the “Arrow.”
Read the full summary
Motion for leave to amend the answers in two actions between the same parties, and for certain other relief. These actions were brought to compel an accounting from defendants of the amount received by them for the insurance of the steamboat “ Arrow,” which was destroyed by fire, and for the earnings of, and disbursements and expenses made and incurred upon, the “Thomas E. Hulse” and the “Arrow.” The complaints alleged that defendants, William Eadford and Thomas E. Hulse, were joint-owners, tenants in common, and proprietors of the “Arrow,” and that the same parties, with one Yan Wart, were…
1Opinion of the CourtBarnard, J.
—1. The new matter proposed to be set up in the answer, if uncontrgdicted or unexplained, constitutes a good defence. Parties, however, are not" allowed to amend their pleadings on motion, unless they offer some good and satisfactory excuse for not having before presented the matters in respect to which'they seek an amendment.
The excuse these defendants offer is, that defendant Radford was ignorant of it till after February 11, 1861, and the proof they adduce is the affidavit of said Radford. This is fully met by the affidavit of the plaintiff, who swears that said Radford knew of the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Mutual Loan Ass'n v. LesserAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1903
- Barnum v. WilliamsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1904