Case Name: William Hughes v. Elisha Bloomer et al.
Court: Saratoga Chancery Court
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1841-08-17
Citations: 1 Sarat. Ch. Sent. 62
Docket Number: 
Parties: William Hughes v. Elisha Bloomer et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Saratoga Chancery Sentinel
Volume: 1
Pages: 1070–1070

Head Matter:
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.

Opinion:
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.