Legal Opinion

Wulff v. Lindsay

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided March 20, 1903No. Civil No. 799Published

APPEAL from a judgment of the District Court of the First Judicial District in and for the County of Santa Cruz. Geo. It. Davis, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtKent, C. J.

In this case a complaint was filed by the plaintiff and answered by the defendants. Later an amended complaint was filed, and the defendants filed an answer to the amended complaint, setting up a plea in abatement and a motion to strike, both of which were not contained in the answer to the original complaint. The plaintiff demurred to these pleas on the ground that they were interposed too late, as they were not contained in the original answer. This demurrer was overruled by the court, and the plaintiff in his appeal assigns as error this action of the court in so overruling his demurrer to…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Coxson v. DolandNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1866
  2. Levy v. LeatherwoodArizona Supreme Court · 1898
  3. R. H. Burmister & Sons Co. v. Empire Gold Mining & Milling Co.Arizona Supreme Court · 1903
  4. Adams v. O'ConnorArizona Supreme Court · 1899

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API