Benjamin v. Casey

63 N.E. 925, 181 Mass. 542, 1902 Mass. LEXIS 918
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided May 23, 1902·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

By the Court.

The allowance of the amendment was a matter of discretion. Nothing appears except that leave to amend was asked at the last moment and was denied. This is not ground for exception.

Petition dismissed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Benjamin v. Casey, 63 N.E. 925, 181 Mass. 542, 1902 Mass. LEXIS 918 (Mass. 1902).

63 N.E. 925 (Benjamin v. Casey) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Successors of Martínez v. Tomás Dávila & Co.
19 P.R. 503 (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, 1913)
Sucs. de José Martínez v. Tomás Dávila y Ca.
19 P.R. Dec. 527 (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, 1913)