Case ID: sarat-ch-sent_1/html/1070-03.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

William Hughes v. Elisha Bloomer et al.
    
    
      Pleading&emdash;Practice of amending answer discontinued.
    
    J. Rhoades for complainant.
    W. Kent and B. D. Silliman for defendant.
   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.