Witherspoon v. Van Dolar
New York Supreme Court
Motion to strike out answer, and for judgment for the frivolousness of the answer. Action upon a bill of exchange, by the payees against the acceptor. The answer denied that the payees were the owners and-' holders of the draft, and alleged that it belonged to one Meachum; and in a second answer, set up deceit in the sale of the goods by said Meachum, for which the bill was drawn and accepted. The answer was sworn to, and was accompanied by an affidavit of merits.
1Opinion of the Court
E. Darwin Smith, Justice.
The answer is clearly frivolous so far as relates to the denial that the plaintiffs are owners and holders of the draft. This has been so held in numerous decisions. It is considered in such decisions a simple denial of a legal conclusion; and the second answer is bad also, as it sets up no matter of defence against the payee and holder of the draft. But if the matters stated in both answers were properly stated in one, showing, as the defendant claims, that the payees are mere agents of Meachum, for the collection of the bill, and have no beneficial interest therein,…
2Cited by2 opinions
- White v. DrakeNew York Supreme Court · 1877
- Plant v. SchuylerThe Superior Court of New York City · 1867