From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Butler v. King

Supreme Court of California
Oct 1, 1858
10 Cal. 342 (Cal. 1858)

Opinion

         Appeal from the County Court of Amador County.

         This action is upon a contract for beef furnished the defendant. The complaint alleges that the beef was furnished to the defendant, but does not allege that it was furnished " at his request." The plaintiff recovered judgment in the Justice's Court, and the defendant appealed to the County Court, where he moved to dismiss the case, on the ground that the complaint does not set forth any cause of action. The plaintiff thereupon moved for leave to amend his complaint. The County Court denied the motion of the plaintiff to amend, and granted the motion of the defendant, and dismissed the case.

         From the judgment of dismissal, the plaintiff appealed.

         COUNSEL:

         W. W. Cope, for Appellant.

          G. W. Seaton, for Respondent.


         JUDGES: Field, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. Terry, C. J., and Baldwin, J., concurring.

         OPINION

          FIELD, Judge

         The County Court erred in refusing to allow the plaintiff to amend his complaint, and in dismissing the suit. Amendments should be readily allowed whenever they will tend to the furtherance of justice, and the greatest liberality in this respect should be extended to pleadings in Justices' Courts.

         Judgment reversed, and cause remanded.


Summaries of

Butler v. King

Supreme Court of California
Oct 1, 1858
10 Cal. 342 (Cal. 1858)
Case details for

Butler v. King

Case Details

Full title:BUTLER v. KING

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Oct 1, 1858

Citations

10 Cal. 342 (Cal. 1858)

Citing Cases

Hall v. Rice

The amendments to the complaint were properly allowed. ( Cooke v. Spears, 2 Cal. 409; Stearns v. Martin, 4…

Baker v. Southern California Railway Co.

Citations of appellant only decide that an amendment by the party transferring, which abandons the…