Thompson v. Steam Mill Co.
Thompson v. Steam Mill Co.
62 N.H. 303
Thompson v. Steam Mill Co.
Opinion of the Court
The cause of action alleged in the proposed amendment was not in existence at the date of the writ. An amendment, when made, relates back; and a writ after amendment stands as if the matter of the amendment had been incorporated into it at the time it was instituted. Whittier v. Varney, 10 N. H. 291, 303. A declaration, stating facts essential to the maintenance of the action to have happened after the date of the writ, is insufficient, and an amendment alleging a cause of action arising after the commencement of the suit is not allowed.
Amendment disallowed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.