Kingsley v. Gilman
Supreme Court of Minnesota
This is an appeal from an order of the District Court for Hennepin County, striking out a portion of the answer of the defendant Gilman. The case is fully stated in the opinien.
1Opinion of the Court
*516 By the Court
McMillan, J.
This is an appeal from an order of the District Court striking out a portion of tbe defendant’s answer. The portion of the answer stricken out is as follows: “The said defendant denies each and every statement and averment, and every part of tbe same, in said amended complaint contained, as therein stated or otherwise, save as hereinafter stated, admitted or qualified.” The grounds of tbe motion to strike out this portion of tbe answer were as follows: That “tbe same is so indefinite and uncertain, that tbe precise nature of tbe defence is not apparent, and that tbe…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Caldwell v. BruggermanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1860
- Montour v. PurdySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1866
- Bond v. CorbettSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1858
- Starbuck v. DunkleeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1865
- Dean v. LeonardSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1864
3Cited by7 opinions
- Stimson v. StimsonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1915
- Wesley v. DiamondSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1910
- Seffert v. Northern Pacific Railway Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1907
- Leyde v. MartinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1870
- Tullis v. ShannonWashington Supreme Court · 1892
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.