People ex rel. Rumsey v. Woods
2 Sandf. 652
Opinion
after advising with Oakley, Ch. J., and Yanderpoel, J., said, the judgment is irregular and must be set aside. The practice contended for on behalf of the plaintiff, would be very unjust. It by no means follows, that because Woods did not defend the original complaint, that he was not desirous to answer to the complaint as amended. He should have been served with notice of the amendment so as to give him an opportunity to answer, if he were so advised.
Rule accordingly.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
People ex rel. Rumsey v. Woods, 2 Sandf. 652 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1849).
2 Sandf. 652 (People ex rel. Rumsey v. Woods) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Thompson v. Johnson
60 Cal. 292 (California Supreme Court, 1882)
Derby v. Hannin
5 Abb. Pr. 150 (New York Supreme Court, 1856)