From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Morgan v. Joyce

Supreme Court of New Hampshire Strafford
Jun 1, 1891
30 A. 1119 (N.H. 1891)

Opinion

Decided June, 1891.

The justice of an amendment changing the form of action is a question of fact determinable at the trial term.

CASE. The plaintiff excepted to the denial of his motion to amend by adding a count in debt.

O. S. Cormier, for the plaintiff.

W. S. D. R. Pierce, for the defendant.


Exception overruled. Wendell v. Mugridge, 19 N.H. 109, 113, 114; Baker v. Davis, 22 N.H. 27, 33-35; Piper v. Hilliard, 58 N.H. 198; Barker v. Savage, 58 N.H. 252; Redding v. Dodge, 59 N.H. 98; Edes v. Herrick, 61 N.H. 60, 61; Garvin v. Legery, 61 N.H. 153; Logue v. Clark, 62 N.H. 184, 185; Cocheco Aq. Association v. Railroad, 62 N.H. 345; Langdon v. Buchanan, 62 N.H. 657, 661; Hardy v. Nye, 63 N.H. 612; Gagnon v. Connor, 64 N.H. 276; Morse v. Whitcher, 64 N.H. 591; Gage v. Gage, ante, pp. 282, 292.

CARPENTER, J., did not sit: the others concurred.


Summaries of

Morgan v. Joyce

Supreme Court of New Hampshire Strafford
Jun 1, 1891
30 A. 1119 (N.H. 1891)
Case details for

Morgan v. Joyce

Case Details

Full title:MORGAN v. JOYCE

Court:Supreme Court of New Hampshire Strafford

Date published: Jun 1, 1891

Citations

30 A. 1119 (N.H. 1891)
66 N.H. 476

Citing Cases

Jenness v. Jones

Whether justice required the allowance of the amendment adding an additional count to the declaration was a…

Jaques v. Chandler

See Jones v. Curling, 13 Q. B. Div. 262, 267. Considering the manifest reason of the provision, the probable…