Saratoga Chancery Court, 1841

Hughes v. Bloomer

Hughes v. Bloomer
Saratoga Chancery Court · Decided August 17, 1841
1 Sarat. Ch. Sent. 62; 1841 N.Y. LEXIS 437

Counsel

J. Rhoades for complainant., W. Kent and B. D. Silliman for defendant.

Hughes v. Bloomer

Opinion of the Court

The chancellor decided in this case that the practice of amending the answer of a defendant, which formerly prevailed, had been discontinued in this country as well as in England; that the modern practice is, upon a proper case shown to the court, to permit the defendant to file a supplemental answer, thus giving the complainant the benefit of the original answer, with the explanations or denials contained in the supplemental answer. Order of the vice-chancellor affirmed, without costs to either party on the appeal.

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