Hamilton v. Holcomb

1 Johns. Cas. 29
New York Supreme Court·Decided January 15, 1799·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The case of Newnham v. Law, which has. been cited, is in point. Courts of late, have adopted the practice of granting all amendments, to which the party would have been entitled, as of course, provided it be of no prejudice to the other party. The rule must be made absolute on payment of the costs of this motion, and of the writ of error.

Footnotes

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

Hamilton v. Holcomb, 1 Johns. Cas. 29 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1799).

1 Johns. Cas. 29 (Hamilton v. Holcomb) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Danforth v. Danforth
111 Ill. 236 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1884)
Brown v. The Cadmus
4 F. Cas. 360 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York, 1856)