New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1874

Lanning v. Heath

Lanning v. Heath
New Jersey Court of Chancery · Decided October 15, 1874 · Chahcellor, Yice
25 N.J. Eq. 425

Counsel

Mr. J. Wilson and Mr. JRiehey, for the motion., Mr. W. D. Holt and Mr. Qummere, contra..

Lanning v. Heath

Opinion of the Court

The Yice-Chahcellor.

I think leave to amend should be granted. The proposed’ amendments are in writing, and should be made in accordance with the fifty-seventh rule. They must be made upon payment of costs, and without prejudice to the injunction or other orders heretofore made in the suit.

I think the answer should not be withdrawn, but left on file. The bill and answer should remain as they are, and the-suit go on upon the newly engrossed amended bill.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.