Burgess v. Bugbee

100 Mass. 152
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided October 15, 1868·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Chapman, C. J.

When the writ was entered, the declaration consisted of a count on an account annexed, but without a bill of particulars. Such a count was amendable by annexing a bill of particulars, before the existence of the practice act. Tarbell v. Dickinson, 3 Cush. 345. But the power of courts to allow amendments has since been much extended. Gen. Sts. c. 129, §§ 40-42. The declaration was sufficient to give the justice jurisdiction; and, having jurisdiction, he was authorized to allow the amendment. Exceptions overruled.

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

Burgess v. Bugbee, 100 Mass. 152 (Mass. 1868).

100 Mass. 152 (Burgess v. Bugbee) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Commonwealth v. Green
20 N.E.2d 417 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1939)
Harrington v. Tuttle
64 Me. 474 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1874)