Mowry v. Kerrins

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

Mowry v. Kerrins

11 R.I. 556, 1877 R.I. LEXIS 42

Supreme Court of Rhode Island·Decided June 11, 1877·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Motion to amend a plea in abatement. The plaintiff, who demurs to the plea, contends that it cannot be amended.

*557 Elisha O. Mowry, for plaintiff. A. J. Cushing, for defendant.

The same point was before the court in Hoppin & Wife v. Jenckes, 9 R. I. 102, 106, and was there argued by able counsel and many authorities cited. The court there decided to allow the amendment.

Our statute allowing amendments is very broad in its provisions, and although pleas in abatement are called in the books dilatory pleas, they sometimes, under our practice, present very important questions. We think the present case is a proper one for the exercise of the discretion of the court.

Motion granted.

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

Per Curiam.

Motion to amend a plea in abatement. The plaintiff, who demurs to the plea, contends that it cannot be amended.

*557 Elisha O. Mowry, for plaintiff. A. J. Cushing, for defendant.

The same point was before the court in Hoppin & Wife v. Jenckes, 9 R. I. 102, 106, and was there argued by able counsel and many authorities cited. The court there decided to allow the amendment.

Our statute allowing amendments is very broad in its provisions, and although pleas in abatement are called in the books dilatory pleas, they sometimes, under our practice, present very important questions. We think the present case is a proper one for the exercise of the discretion of the court.

Motion granted.

Mowry v. Kerrins, 11 R.I. 556, 1877 R.I. LEXIS 42 (R.I. 1877).

Pincite

11 R.I. 556 (Mowry v. Kerrins) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.