Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges

JOSEPHINE COFFIN v. WILLIAM COFFIN.

Upon the amendment of a libel by stating a different ground for divorce, after the trial, the question whether justice requires that the libelee be given a further hearing is for the determination of the trial court.

PLUMMER, J.

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 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.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

COFFIN v. COFFIN
(Apr 1, 1924)