Case ID: f-cas_8/html/0009-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "CHOATE, District Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Case No. 4,133.
    In re DUNCAN et al.
    [18 N. B. R. 42.]
    
    District Court, S. D. New York.
    June 8, 1878.
    [For previous proceedings in the case, see •Cases Nos. 4,131 and 4,132.]
    F. N. Bangs, for baxikrupts.
    Field & Deyo and Howard Payson Wilde, for opposing creditors.
    
      
       [Reprinted by permission.]
    
   CHOATE, District Judge.

The amendments are in accordance with the order of the court As to all the other ■objections raised by the exceptions, I think that they must be considered as already passed upon by the court, or as made too late. All objections to specifications should be raised by the exceptions first filed. So far as the exceptions now taken are the same as were taken before, the case was heard, and the order, having sustained the exceptions in certain respects, must be deemed to have disallowed them in all other respects. They cannot now be renewed. If the amendment allowed is in effect the making of a specification, substantially different from the former, the right to except thereto of course exists. But that is not this ease. If this practice were not adhered to there would be no end of dilatory proceedings, and it works no practical injustice. The exceptions to the third specification were taken before, and must, therefore, be overruled.

Exceptions overruled. Case to stand for argument on the specifications, either party to have leave to take further testimony before the register upon notice.