Chapman v. Chapman
New York Supreme Court
Motion by plaintiff for judgment, pursuant to section 247 of the Code, for frivolousness of the answer of the complaint.
Read the full summary
Motion by plaintiff for judgment, pursuant to section 247 of the Code, for frivolousness of the answer of the complaint. The action was an equitable one, and the plaintiff demanded judgment in the complaint, that the defendant execute a deed of certain land; and the answer was as foffows: “The defendant in this action, in answer to the complaint of the plaintiff, says that he denies each and every aHegation in said >. complaint, except that the said plaintiff caused to be prepared a deed of said premises, and demanded the execution thereof, and that defendant refused to execute the same.”
1Opinion of the CourtBalcom, J.
It is claimed that the answer is frivolous, because it is that the defendant “ says that he denies,” &c., instead of being simply that the defendant “ denies,” &c. It is conceded it would be good if the words “says that he” had been left out of it. Arthur agt. Brooks (14 Barb. 533) and Blake agt. Eldred (18 How. Pr. R. 240) are relied upon to show that the answer is frivolous: These authorities support that position; but, with all due deference to them, I am unable to satisfy myself that the answer should be adjudged frivolous.
It is provided by section 149 of the Code, that the answer may…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Arthur v. BrooksNew York Supreme Court · 1853
3Cited by3 opinions
- Wadleigh v. Marathon County BankWisconsin Supreme Court · 1883
- Ledgerwood Manufacturing Co. v. BairdThe Superior Court of New York City · 1884
- Moen v. EldredSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1876