McMonagle v. Nolan

98 Mass. 320
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedNovember 15, 1867
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 98 Mass. 320 (McMonagle v. Nolan) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
McMonagle v. Nolan, 98 Mass. 320 (Mass. 1867).

Opinion

Foster, J.

The statement filed by the petitioner conforms to the requirements of Gen. Sts. c. 151, § 13.

No objection to the sufficiency of the petition was taken by demurrer or answer. And the general objection at the hearing, which pointed out no particular defects, cannot be allowed to prevail. It is expressly provided in Gen. Sts. c. 151, § 17, that [322]*322“ the court may at any time allow either party to amend his pleadings as in actions at common law.” Under this authority the amendment offered was properly allowed; and if any other objection to the petition had been specified, it might have been obviated in the same way.

We perceive no foundation for the objection that the identity of the vessel was destroyed, and the lien upon it, for this cause, lost. Exceptions overruled.

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

Related

Goulding v. Smith
114 Mass. 487 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1874)
Donnell v. Starlight
103 Mass. 227 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1869)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
98 Mass. 320, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcmonagle-v-nolan-mass-1867.