Meeker v. Lehigh Valley R.

S.D. New York

Meeker v. Lehigh Valley R.

175 F. 320, 1909 U.S. App. LEXIS 5751

CourtDistrict Court, S.D. New York

DecidedDecember 27, 1909

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 175 F. 320 (Meeker v. Lehigh Valley R.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Meeker v. Lehigh Valley R., 175 F. 320, 1909 U.S. App. LEXIS 5751 (S.D.N.Y. 1909).

Pincite

Opinion

HOLT, District Judge.

This is a demurrer to an amended complaint. A previous complaint was demurred to, and the demurrer sustained by Judge Ray, with leave to amend. The complaint was then amended, and this demurrer filed.

The present amended complaint, although considerably changed in form, in my opinion, states substantially the same cause of action as its predecessor. The grounds of Judge Ray’s decision, if correct, apply with equal force to the present amended complaint. In such a case the previous decision should be followed. If any other rule obtained, in any case in which a demurrer has been decided on the merits, it would always be possible, by making immaterial amendments, to have the same question brought on again before other judges successively. Such a proceeding is nothing, in fact, but an appeal from one judge to another. Without passing, therefore, at all upon the merits, I simply follow Judge Ray’s decision.

Demurrer sustained.

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

HOLT, District Judge.

This is a demurrer to an amended complaint. A previous complaint was demurred to, and the demurrer sustained by Judge Ray, with leave to amend. The complaint was then amended, and this demurrer filed.

The present amended complaint, although considerably changed in form, in my opinion, states substantially the same cause of action as its predecessor. The grounds of Judge Ray’s decision, if correct, apply with equal force to the present amended complaint. In such a case the previous decision should be followed. If any other rule obtained, in any case in which a demurrer has been decided on the merits, it would always be possible, by making immaterial amendments, to have the same question brought on again before other judges successively. Such a proceeding is nothing, in fact, but an appeal from one judge to another. Without passing, therefore, at all upon the merits, I simply follow Judge Ray’s decision.

Demurrer sustained.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

175 F. 320, 1909 U.S. App. LEXIS 5751, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/meeker-v-lehigh-valley-r-nysd-1909.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack