Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Cockshot's Lessee versus Hopkins, 1787 — 2 U.S. 97 · caselaw · US
General
Cockshot's Lessee versus Hopkins
2 U.S. 972 Dall. 97·Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·1787·PA
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
April Term, 1787.
Cockshot’s Lessee versus Hopkins.
EJECTMENT. The demise laid in the declaration having expired, during the pendency of the action, Coulthurst, moved for leave to amend by inserting the word twenty, instead of seven, so as to enlarge the term ; And he cited Cowp. 841. 4 Burr. 2448.
Lewis
was about to reply, when the Chief Justice observed, that the point was not only decided by the English authorities, but by, a recent adjudication in this Court.
[MAJORITY — By the Court:]
By the Court:
—Let the amendment be allowed on payment of costs.