Dieckerhoef v. Robertson
32 F. 73, 1887 U.S. App. LEXIS 2715
CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York
DecidedAugust 16, 1887
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases
This text of 32 F. 73 (Dieckerhoef v. Robertson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
Dieckerhoef v. Robertson, 32 F. 73, 1887 U.S. App. LEXIS 2715 (circtsdny 1887).
Opinion
This application, which is for leave to amend a bill of particulars in an action to recover excess of duties, may be best answered by quoting the decision of Judge Brown in Levi v. Robertson, (filed August 5, 1887.)
“ Under section 3012, an amendment of bill of particulars' may, I think, be made.as in any other case of reasonable excuse for a bona fide mistake. ' But the specific cause of error or mistake should be shown, and why the original was not made in proper form. The within affidavit is insufficient. If allowed, it would in effect abolish section 3012 in part.”
The, affidavit on which this motion is made is also insufficient. Motion denied, without prejudice to a similar motion on additional affidavits.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
In re Maples
105 F. 919 (D. Montana, 1901)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
32 F. 73, 1887 U.S. App. LEXIS 2715, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dieckerhoef-v-robertson-circtsdny-1887.