Goldstein v. Krause
Idaho Supreme Court
APPEAL from District Court, Shoshone County. A sham answer is one which is good in form, but false in fact, .such falsity being proven by the failure of the defendants to deny the truth of the matters set up in the affidavits in support of the motion to strike. (Costorfs v. Taafe, 18 Cal. 385; Fay v. Cobb, 51 Cal. 313; Arata v. Mining Co., 65 Cal. 340, 4 Pac. 195.) The answer was pleaded in good faith, and, if sufficient in law, it should have been demurred to.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from District Court, Shoshone County. A sham answer is one which is good in form, but false in fact, .such falsity being proven by the failure of the defendants to deny the truth of the matters set up in the affidavits in support of the motion to strike. (Costorfs v. Taafe, 18 Cal. 385; Fay v. Cobb, 51 Cal. 313; Arata v. Mining Co., 65 Cal. 340, 4 Pac. 195.) The answer was pleaded in good faith, and, if sufficient in law, it should have been demurred to. If true, it was a good defense. (Waples on Attachments, p. 208, note 2; citing Burton v. Wynne, 55 Ga. 651; Clough v. Bucle, 6 Neb.…
1Opinion of the CourtHays, C. J.
This action was brought upon a promissory note. The complaint alleges the making and delivering of the note to one Henry Bernstine, by the defendants, who were' copartners, under the firm name of Krause & Boehm, and that the same became due on the twenty-third day of August, 1884, and had not been paid; that prior to the maturity of *295the note Henry Bernstine duly indorsed and delivered the note to this plaintiff, who has ever since been the owner and holder of the note. Defendants, Krause & Boehm, answering, admit the partnership; the making and delivering of the note; that the same became due…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Fairchild v. . the Ogdensburgh, Clayton and Rome R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1857
- Wedderspoon v. RogersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
3Cited by3 opinions
- Rhea v. HackneySupreme Court of Florida · 1934
- Tullis v. ShannonWashington Supreme Court · 1892
- Brown v. JonesIdaho Supreme Court · 1930