Case ID: johns-ch_1/html/0434-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "The Chancellor.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Parker and Bliss against Grant and others.
    
      May 1st.
    The 11th rule of June, 1806, allowing the plaintiff to amend his bill, of course, at any time before answer, plea, or demurrer filed, without costs, does not apply to the case of a bill sworn to by the plaintiff as an injunction bill.
    PETITION, by the defendants, to have the bill in this cause, which was an injunction bill, and had been amended by the plaintiffs, taken off the files of the court; on the ground, that after the injunction had issued, and after the defendants’ solicitor had given notice of his appearance, but before he had actually entered it with the clerk, or had put in an answer, the plaintiffs had amended the bill in a material part without leave, or notice, and without the bill having been resworn to.
    
      D. Rodman, in support of the petition.
    
      Van Vechten, contra.
   The Chancellor.

The 11th rule oí June, 1806, ought not to be applied to the case of a bill sworn to by the party. It would be like a party meddling with, and altering, his own affidavit on file, without leave; and it would become difficult, and, perhaps, impossible, afterwards, to know to what part of the bill the oath was to be applied. The letter of the rule does, undoubtedly," apply to the case, for it is general in its terms; and for that reason I shall only direct the amendment to be expunged, and shall suffer the costs of this application to abide the event of the suit.

Order accordingly.