Case ID: njl_43/html/0454-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

ISAAC N. QUIMBY, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. MARY ANN KING, DEFENDANT IN ERROR.
    Error to Hudson Circuit.
    For the plaintiff in error, 8. B. Ransom.
    
    For the defendant in error, Collins & Corbin.
    
   Per Curiam.

The judge, in accordance with the directions of the one hundred and thirty-eighth section of the Practice act, amended the pleadings for the purpose of determining, in the existing suit, the real question in controversy between the parties. There was no error in this, and consequently there was no error in the refusal to charge complained of, which was correct in view of the amendment.

For affirmance — The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Dixon, Parker, Reed, Van Syckel, Clement, Cole, Dodd, Green, Whittaker. 11.

For reversal—None.