Givens v. Wheeler
2 Colo. L. Rep. 429
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Givens v. Wheeler. Read the opinion of the Court — 6 Colo. 149 →
Opinions
The amended complaint in this case was bad, in that it stated an entirely new cause of action. This is not allowable either at common law or under the Code. Bliss’ Plead., Sec. 429, and cases cited.
The replication was vicious for the same reason.
The judgment of the Court below is affirmed, with costs.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Givens v. Wheeler, 2 Colo. L. Rep. 429 (Colo. 1881).
2 Colo. L. Rep. 429 (Givens v. Wheeler) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Ramirez v. Murray
5 Cal. 222 (California Supreme Court, 1855)
People ex rel. Coller v. Board of Supervisors
3 How. Pr. 379 (New York Supreme Court, 1849)
Barnes v. City of Beloit
19 Wis. 93 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1865)
Board of Supervisors v. Decker
34 Wis. 378 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1874)
Warren Manufacturing Co. v. Hoffman
62 Md. 165 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1884)