Phillips v. Stein
This text of 158 N.E. 198 (Phillips v. Stein) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Morris Stein brought an action against Kate Phillips in the Cuyahoga Common Pleas. The action was tried upon a second amended petition. Judgment was awarded to Stein, error was prosecuted and the Court of Appeals reversed the judgment and remanded- the case for a new trial. Thereupon a third amended petition was filed and the cause was heard to the trial judge, and judgment was rendered- in favor of Stein.
Error was prosecuted and it was argued that the trial judge committed prejudicial error in permitting Stein to amend his third amendéd petition by interlineation, in order to conform with the testimony. The Court of Appeals held:—
1. Authority granted to courts to permit amendments of pleadings, is provided for in 11363 GC.
2. In furtherance of justice, the court may amend any pleading, process or proceedings,; by adding or striking out the name of any party, or by correcting a mistake in the name of the party, or a mistake in any other respect. Boehmke v. Company, 88 OS. 163.
3. “To allow amendments in the interest of justice is broad and in absence of evidence' to the contrary, a reviewing court will assume' that the court was justified by the evidence in permitting the amendment.” Wicker v. Messinger, 22 OCC. 713.
Judgment affirmed.
(Shields, PJ. and Lemert, J., concur.)
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
158 N.E. 198, 25 Ohio App. 423, 5 Ohio Law. Abs. 532, 1927 Ohio App. LEXIS 508, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/phillips-v-stein-ohioctapp-1927.