General
FAYERWEATHER et al. v. RITCH et al.
94 F. 1021·United States Circuit Court for the Southern District of New York·1899
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
FAYERWEATHER et al. v. RITCH et al.
(Circuit Court, S. D. New York.
June 26, 1899.)
Motion to Amend Bill of Complaint.
Roger M. Sherman, for the motion.
James L. Bishop and C. N. Bovie, opposed.
[MAJORITY — LACOMBE, Circuit Judge.]
LACOMBE, Circuit Judge.
The motion to amend is granted as prayed. Tills practically reopens the whole case, and all parties defendant will have 20 days’ time after service of the amended bill to plead, answer, or demur thereto. The case being thus reopened, a plea or a demurrer, if interposed, will be considered as a. first dilatory pleading, and, in the event of its being overruled, the party interposing it will be allowed to answer. The defendants trustees of Hamilton College may have 20 days to elect whether it will plead, answer, or demur to (he amended bill, or whether it will stand on the evidence already taken on the issues raised by its present plea and replication thereto, and the submission thereof heretofore made to this court.