Arrieta v. Morrissey
New York Court of Common Pleas
Appeal from an order made at a special term, denying a motion to make tlie complaint more definite and certain, under section 160 of the Code of Procedure. The complaint contained two counts.
Read the full summary
Appeal from an order made at a special term, denying a motion to make tlie complaint more definite and certain, under section 160 of the Code of Procedure. The complaint contained two counts. In the first, it was alleged that during the months of August and September, 1863, the defendant, John Morrissey, kept a gambling establishment at Saratoga Springs, and that during such times the plaintiff, Pablo de Arrieta, at such establishment, made certain wagers and bets, which were, made to depend upon a game of lot or chance, commonly called “ faro,” which game of dot or chance, was under the…
1ConcurrenceBrady, J.
Assuming the complaint to be sound, and that the various expositions by Judge Daly are correct in reference to the law governing complaints in actions of this character, nevertheless the Code, § 160, applies to them. It has been held (Betts v. Bache, 14 Abb. Pr., 279) that a' complaint framed as suggested by Judge Daly is deficient in certainty; and the court, per Robebtsow, J., says “ The authors of the Code un- “ 'doubtedly intended to require parties in their pleadings to “show generally that they had a good cause of action punless “ the adverse party complained of not being sufficiently…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Betts v. BacheThe Superior Court of New York City · 1862