Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

15 Abb. Pr. 51

Watson v. Rushmore

New York Supreme Court

Decided September 15, 1862

New York Supreme Court · decided 1862-09-15

Motion to strike out answer as sham. This action was brought by William Watson and another to recover the sum of $2,800, the amount due on a promissory note, dated October 30, 1860, and executed by the defendants, Thomas L. Rushmore, John A. Cone, Pendleton G. De Graw, William A. Harding, James A. Timpson, William Johnson, George Corbin, and Lyell T. Olmstead, who at said time composed the firm of Rushmore, Cone & Co. It appeared by the affidavit of Mr. Sweet, one of the…

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently April 1874

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1862-09-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Barnard, J.

¶1The sole question presented in this motion is, whether a plaintiff within twenty days after service of his complaint containing several causes of action, can amend his complaint of course, without costs, by striking out one of the causes of action.

¶2The language of section 172 is sufficiently broad to allow the pleader to amend his pleading in any mode he sees fit, subject to the restrictions contained in that section.

¶3It has been repeatedly held that a new and distinct cause of action or defence may be added under this section. (McQueen a. Babcock, 13 Abbotts’ Pr., 268, and cases there cited.)

¶4Upon the principle laid down in McQueen a. Babcock, that section 172 gives an unqualified right of amendment once of course, and without costs, subject only to the restrictions in that section contained, it cannot be denied that plaintiff has a right to amend his complaint within the time allowed by that section, by striking out one of the causes of action.

¶5Motion granted, with $10 costs.

/15/abbpr/51 · .json · Public domain