Inhabitants of Parkman v. Nutting

59 Me. 398
CourtSupreme Judicial Court of Maine
DecidedJuly 1, 1871
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 59 Me. 398 (Inhabitants of Parkman v. Nutting) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Judicial Court of Maine primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Inhabitants of Parkman v. Nutting, 59 Me. 398 (Me. 1871).

Opinion

Appleton, C. J.

The writ in this case contains counts for money had and received, and on an account annexed.

The earliest item, in the account annexed, bears the date of Jan. 15, 1864. The specification in the writ is .that under the counts for money had and received, the plaintiifs claimed “ to prove and recover of said defendant the sum of sixteen thousand dollars, that amount of money delivered him on the 15th Jan., 1864, and since according to the account annexed.”

The plaintiffs propose to amend so as to enable them to recover amounts received since Jan. 1, 1863. This is manifestly introducing a new cause of action. Under the writ as originally drawn, the defendant could not be held to account for sums received between Jan. 1, 1863, and Jan. 15, 1864. By the amendment he would be liable to account for all such sums. While the utmost liberality is allowed in the matter of amendments, the authorities are uniform that no new cause of action shall be introduced against the protestations of the defendant. The cause of action, as originally stated, was clearly and distinctly set forth. There was no [404]*404defect to be amended. The proposed amendment is not the correction of a defect in pleading, but the addition of a cause of action not set forth in the original declaration.

The ruling, denying the amendment, was in accordance with the well-settled rules of law.

So far as the evidence offered relates to the proposed amendment, it was properly excluded.

Cutting, Kent, Walton, DioKerson, and Daneorth, JJ., concurred.

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

Related

Boscho, Inc. v. Knowles
83 A.2d 122 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1951)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
59 Me. 398, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/inhabitants-of-parkman-v-nutting-me-1871.