Noyes v. Richardson
Noyes v. Richardson.
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Clark, J.
The amendment cured a defective description of the land embraced in the mortgage. It changed neither the form nor the cause of action. If the plaintiff had brought separate actions for the foreclosure of his mortgage upon the separate parcels of land, the court would have consolidated them, upon a suggestion that the several parcels were embraced in one mortgage; and upon the same principle, to save an additional bill of costs, this amendment should be allowed. Its allowance imposed no hardship upon the defendant: its rejection would have caused injustice to both parties.
Stebbins v. Insurance Co., 59 N. H. 143.
-Exceptions overruled.
Allen, J., did not sit: the others concurred.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 0 cases
No case in this database cites this case.