Chisholm v. Abbott

74 F. 640, 20 C.C.A. 572, 1896 U.S. App. LEXIS 1965
Court of Appeals for the First Circuit·Decided May 22, 1896·No. No. 140·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PEE CUEIAM.

With reference to the petition for leave to apply to the district court for permission to amend, the allegations sought to be amended were framed with such deliberation as they now stand, that at the hearing of the cause in this court they were insisted on by the petitioners, both orally and in their brief. There [642] is no equity in the application. If we have the power, after judgment, to certify this case to the supreme court (Watch Co. v. Robbins, 148 U. S. 266, 13 Sup. Ct. 594), we see in it no such peculiarities as render it appropriate that we should do so. It is full time the litigation in this court should cease. The petitions that leave to amend may be reserved, and for a certificate to the supreme court, are denied.

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

Chisholm v. Abbott, 74 F. 640, 20 C.C.A. 572, 1896 U.S. App. LEXIS 1965 (1st Cir. 1896).

74 F. 640 (Chisholm v. Abbott) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Cella v. Brown
144 F. 742 (Eighth Circuit, 1906)
Post v. Beacon Vacuum Pump & Electrical Co.
89 F. 1 (First Circuit, 1898)