Austin v. Ingham
4 Yeates 346
Opinion
Unquestionably the intention of the legislature was, that formal objections which do not go to the merits of the controversy, shall not be readily listened to. But I can discover their meaning no otherwise, than by their words. It is clear, that the expressions go no further than to permit an amendment of the declaration or statement, and of an alteration of the plea or defence ; and I do not feel myself warranted to extend them by construction.
The motion was denied ; and the jury were dismissed by the court from giving a verdict.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Austin v. Ingham, 4 Yeates 346 (Pa. 1807).
4 Yeates 346 (Austin v. Ingham) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Shinkle v. Crock
17 Pa. 159 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1852)