Supplemental Bill

In equity practice. A bill brought as an addition to an original bill to supply some defect in its original frame or structure which cannot be supplied by amendment. See 1 Paige Ch. (N. Y.) 200; 15 Miss. 456; 22 Barb. (N. Y.) 161; 14 Ala. (N. S.) 147; 18 Ala. (N. S.) 771. It may be brought by a plaintiff or defendant (2 Atk. 533; 2 Ball & B. 140; 1 Story, C. C. [U. S.] 218), and as well after as before a decree (3 Md. Ch. 306; 1 Macn. & G. 405; Story, Eq. Pl. § 338; Hinde, Chanc. Prac. 43), but must be within a reasonable time (2 Halst. [N. J.] 465). See "Original Bill."

In Equity Practice. A bill brought as an addition to an original bill to supply some defect in its original frame or structure which cannot be supplied by amendment. See Stafford v. Howlett, 1 Paige Ch. (N. Y.) 200; Walker y. Gilbert, 7 Smedes & M. (Miss.) 456; Cunningham’s Adm’r v. Rogers, 14 Ala. 147. It may be brought by a plaintiff or defendant; 2 Ball & B. 140; Baker v. Whiting, 1 Sto. 218, Fed. Cas. No. 786; and as well after, as before, a decree; O’Hara v. Shepherd, 3 Md Ch. Dec. 306; 1 Macn. & G. 405; Story, Eq. PI. § 338; Secor v. Singleton, 41 Fed. 725; but must be within a reasonable time; Woodruff’s Ex’rs v. Brugh, 6 N. J. Eq. 465. to introduce another party or to substitute one party for another, is by a supplemental bill or by an original bill in the nature of a supplemental bill; Ross v. City of Ft. Wayne, 63 Fed. 466, 11 C. C. A. 2S8, 24 U. S. App. 113. A supplemental bill in the nature of a bill of review cannot be entertained where no new facts pertinent to the litigation are discussed except such as were known to the complainants at the date of the original decree; City of Omaha v. Rediek, 63 Fed. 1, 11 C. C. A. 1, 27 U. S. App. 204. It may be filed when a necessary party has been omitted; 6 Madd. 360; Ellsworth v. Lambert, 4 Johns. Cli. (N. Y.) 605; Robertson v. Winchester, 85 Tenn. 171, 1 S. W. 781; to introduce a party, who has acquired rights subsequent to the filing of the original bill; Campbell v. Polk Co., 3 la. 472; when, after the parties are at issue and witnesses have been examined, some point not already made seems to be necessary, or some additional discovery is found requisite; Stafford v. Uowlott, 1 Taige Ch. (N. Y.) 200; when new events referring to and supporting the rights and interests already mentioned have occurred subsequently to the filing of the bill; Story, Eq. PI. 336; 5 Beav. 253; for the statement only of facts and circumstances material and beneficial to the merits, and not merely matters of evidence; Jenkins v. Eldredge, 3 Sto. 299, Fed. Cas. No. 7,267; when, after a decision has been made on the original bill, it becomes necessary to bring other matter before the court to get the full effect of it; Story, Eq. PI. § 336; when a material fact, which existed before the filing of the bill, has been omitted, and it can no longer be introduced by way of amendment; Ridgeway v. Toram, 2 Md. Ch. Dec. 303; Mitf. Ch. PI. 55, 61, 325; but only by special leave of court, when it seeks to change the original structure of the bill and introduce a new and different case; 4 Sim. 76, 028; Dias v. Merle, 4 Paige Cb. (N. Y.) 259. Where, after a final decree, a person who has succeeded to the interest of the complainant in such manner as to entitle him to the fall benefit of the decree, finds it necessary to invoke further action to obtain such benefit, he may file a supplemental bill in the original suit; Secor v. Singleton, 41 Fed. 725; but when an executor is substituted as a party in place of his decedent, he need not file a supplemental pleading; Equitable Life Assur. Soc. v. Trimble, 83 Fed. 85, 27 C. C. A. 404. After a decree disposing of the issues, the filing of a new bill by other parties, involving other issues, although connected with the subject-matter of the original litigation, is to be considered a new litigation, although styled a “supplemental bill” and permitted to be filed in the original cause, and the complainant in the original cause is entitled to 329, 16 Sup. Ct. 810, 40 L. Ed. 986. And a supplemental bill filed upon leave granted and notice, which makes an essentially different case from that contemplated in the order granting leave to file it, wild be ordered to be taken from the files; Stockton v. Tobacco Co., 53 N. J. Eq. 400, 32 Atl. 261. The bill must be in respect to the same title, in the same person as the original bill; Story, Eq. PI. 339; and no relief can be had under it upon a cause of action, which did not exist when the original bill was filed; Heffron v. Knickerbocker, 57 111. App. 339; Neubert v. Massman, 37 Fla. 91, 19 So. 625. If the original bill shows no title to relief, a supplemental bill cannot be filed based on facts afterwards occurring; but if the original bill is well founded, a supplemental bill may be filed showing a further title to relief; New York S. & T. Co. v. It. Co., 74 Fed. 67; Putney v. Whitmire, 66 Fed. 385. After a decree has been directed for complainant, a stranger will not be permitted to file a supplemental bill based on his purchase of the cause of action, until a decree is actually entered in the original cause; Hazleton Tripod-Boiler Co. v. R. Co., 72 Fed. 325. A bill by a surviving partner, to settle the partnership affairs, is separate, and distinct from a bill to subject real estate of the deceased partner to firm debts, and the statute of limitations cannot be avoided by styling the second suit a supplemental bill; White v. Joyce, 158 U. S. 128, 15 Sup. Ct. 788, 39 L. Ed. 921. When a patent was assigned to a stranger pending a suit for infringement, the assignee cannot obtain the benefit of the suit brought by the assignor, by a supplemental bill, but he may do it by an original bill in the nature of a supplemental hill; Ross v. Ft. Wayne, 5S Fed. 404. In a suit to remove a cloud from a title, where there is a decree establishing such title in the complainant, which carries a right to possession, a supplemental bill may be filed to enforce that right; Root v. Woolworth, 150 U. S. 401, 14 Sup. Ct. 136, 37 L. Ed. 1123. It must state the original bill, and the proceedings thereon; and, when it is occasioned by an event which has occurred subsequently to the original bill, it must state that event and the consequent alteration with regard to the parties. In general, the supplemental bill must pray that all defendants appear and answer the charges it contains; Story, Eq. PI. § 343. But the supreme court equity rules (Feb. 1, 1913) provide that the statements in the original suit need not be set forth unless the circumstances of the case may require it.

v. Bill, I. 18.