12 N.H. 330 | Superior Court of New Hampshire | 1841
A decree having been entered, in this case, it is very apparent that the plaintiff cannot file a supplemental bill, introducing new facts, as a matter of right. 2 Atkyns 139, order in note; 17 Vesey 178, Perry vs. Phelips; 2 Smith’s Ch. Pr. 64; Mitford’s Pl. 91.
If this bill is allowed, the operation of it must be to open the decree, or at least to suspend farther action upon it, until the new matter is considered ; and this is not in the power of the plaintiff, at his pleasure.
And we are further of opinion, that a supplemental bill, introducing new facts relating to the merits, ought not to be filed as a matter of course, but only by leave of court, upon sufficient cause shown. Such is the practice in New York, in relation to injunction bills at least. 2 Paige’s Ch. R. 333, Eager vs. Price; 3 Paige 294, Lawrence vs. Bolton. And it is said to be most safe to apply for liberty in all cases, 1 Hoffman’s Ch. Pr. 403.
A party cannot amend his bill here, without leave of court, after answer. This bill is in the nature of an amendment.