Harvey v. Spaulding
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from the Dubuque District Court. Action upon a promissory note. The plaintiff demurred to the answer of the defendant, and the demurrer was sustained. The defendant amended, and the plaintiff demurred again, and the demurrer was sustained, upon which the defendant again asked leave to amend, and it was refused. This is the matter assigned as error, and formed the only question before the court.
1Opinion of the CourtWoodward, J.
The plaintiff presents many authorities to show that amendments are in the discretion of the court, and that the permission or refusal, constitutes no ground of error; and that an appellate tribunal will not control that discretion. • But the question is, whether the Code changes the law in any respect, or to any degree. And we believe it does. .
The Code, (section 1755), intends to permit amendments liberally, upon terms prescribed. But the right cannot be without limit, and without restraint. It is not wholly withdrawn from the control of the court. The party amended once, and this was held…
2Cited by1 opinion
- State ex rel. Floyd v. Mayor of KeokukSupreme Court of Iowa · 1865