History
  • No items yet
midpage
Coffin v. Coffin
124 A. 461
N.H.
1924
Check Treatment

The authority of the court to allow the amendment in question cannot be doubted. The parties were in court, and the finding of the court indicated that justice required such an amendment. Jellison v. Jellison, 70 N.H. 633; Sanborn v. Railroad, 76 N.H. 65. In fact the libelee does not deny the right of the court to permit the amendment. But his complaint is that he was not given a further hearing after the amendment was allowed. Whether this privilege should be granted to the libelee is a question *Page 285 of fact to be determined by the trial court. LaCoss v. Lebanon,78 N.H. 413, 417, and cases there cited. If justice requires that the libelee should have a further hearing, it should be granted to him upon application.

Exception overruled.

All concurred.

Case Details

Case Name: Coffin v. Coffin
Court Name: Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Date Published: Apr 1, 1924
Citation: 124 A. 461
Court Abbreviation: N.H.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.