Mason v. Dutcher
New York Court of Common Pleas
Action by Mason against Butcher. Plaintiff moves to strike out certain defenses contained in the answer, and to compel defendant to make the answer more definite and certain.
1Opinion of the CourtGhegkebich, J.
It is well settled that, where there is a semblance of a cause of action or defense set up in a pleading, its sufficiency cannot be determined on a motion to strike it out as redundant or irrelevant. Walter v. Fowler, 85 N. Y. 621; Bradner v. Faulkner, 93 N. Y. 515, 518. The matters sought to be expunged from the answer as irrelevant and redundant, considered together, constitute, in my opinion, more than a semblance of a defense to the cause of action alleged in the amended complaint, and hence the motion to strike out the same should be denied. I think, however, that the words referred to…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Griffin v. . Long Island Railroad Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1886
- Bradner v. . FaulknerNew York Court of Appeals · 1883
- Thompson v. . HalbertNew York Court of Appeals · 1888
- Bridge v. PaysonThe Superior Court of New York City · 1851
- People ex rel. Allen v. MurrayThe Superior Court of the City of New York and Buffalo · 1892
3Cited by1 opinion
- Morgan v. BennettNew York Supreme Court · 1899