Case Name: DULL v. AMIES
Court: Philadelphia District Court
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 1837-10-07
Citations: 2 Miles 144
Docket Number: 
Parties: DULL v. AMIES.
Judges: 
Reporter: Reports of cases determined in the district court for the city and county of Philadelphia
Volume: 2
Pages: 144–144

Head Matter:
DULL v. AMIES.
October 7, 1837.
Motion for leave to file a narr.
When a plaintiff files a statement on certain promissory notes, he will not be allowed afterwards in filing a narr. to add counts on promissory notes, other than those specified in the statement.
THIS was an action brought to September term, 1836. The plaintiff filed a statement under the provisions of the 5th and 6th sections of the act of 21st March, 1806, (Stroud's Puri. tit. Courts,) claiming on certain promissory notes therein described. Defendant pleaded. And now plaintiff moved for leave to file a narr., adding counts on other promissory notes than those specified in the statement.
Williams, for the motion,
cited Farmers & Mechanics Bank v. Israel, 6 S. & R.; 4 Watts 258; 2 Wkart. 32.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.—
By the act of 1806, a statement was allowed to be substituted for a declaration. Once filed, it is, according to the act itself, the exhibit of the plaintiff's cause of action as fully as a declaration is. And it is well settled that an amendment to the pleading by the plaintiff, either at common law or under the statute, shall not be allowed when it introduces a new and distinct cause of action. (See 1 Miles 42, 67.) This would be the effect if the motion were granted here. Amendment under the 6th section of the act of 1806, is limited to " informality" in the pleading as to a declaration; it does not apply to new matter of substance.
Motion refused.