Weston v. Worden

19 Wend. 648
New York Supreme Court·Decided March 15, 1839·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

By the Court,

Bronson, J.

So far as relates to other words of the same character, or imputing the same offence with those already contained in the declaration, the plaintiff may amend on payment of the costs of opposing this motion. [649]*649and the costs of the plea and notice, if the defendant chooses to answer anew. 12 Wendell, 228. 9 id. 430. The cause of action is the same, and the oniy effect of the amendment may be to relieve the plaintiff against the consequences of a variance.

But wé cannot allow him to amend by inserting a new cause of action, where, as in this case, the statute of limitations has probably run. . The amendment must not, therefore, extend to such words as charge the plaintiff with being a quack, or practising without a diploma.

Ordered accordingly,

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

Weston v. Worden, 19 Wend. 648 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1839).

19 Wend. 648 (Weston v. Worden) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Mohr v. Lemle
69 Ala. 180 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1881)
Reed v. Cowley
20 F. Cas. 433 (N.D. New York, 1868)
Bogart v. M'Donald
2 Johns. Cas. 219 (New York Supreme Court, 1801)