Dawty v. Hansell
Dawty v. Hansell
Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
delivering the opinion.
Counsel invoke the benefit of the Amendment Law of 1853-4, and contend that the amendment proposed is either in matter of form or substance; and consequently, the plaintiff is entitled to make it. The ready response is, that what is attempted is no amendment at all, but the substitution of a new action. Parties may amend their pleadings in any respect and at any stage of the proceedings. Rut to substitute an action of ejectment in the .name of Zachariah Jordan, iu the place of that brought by Wm. Y. Hansell against Charles Dawty, is certainly not to amend the writ of Wm. Y. Hansell in any respect.
Suits under the Short Forms may be amended so as to make them conform to those forms; beyond, amendments cannot go.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Charles Dawty, in error v. Wm. Y. Hansell, in error
- Cited By
- 1 case
- Status
- Published