Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Kramlich v. Tullock

Montana Supreme Court

Decided May 4, 1929No. 6,435Published

1ConcurrenceJustice Angstman

I agree with the result announced in the foregoing opinion but not with all that is stated in it. In so far as the opinion holds that the complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute- a cause of action, I disagree with it.

It is true, as stated therein, that plaintiff’s complaint is based upon the claim and delivery statute. Defendant did not demur to the complaint, either generally or specially. The object of definiteness in a complaint is to notify the defendant of the facts the pleader expects to prove so as to enable him to prepare his defense, and so that any judgment obtained…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Howton v. MathiasSupreme Court of Alabama · 1916
  2. Schauer v. MorganMontana Supreme Court · 1923
  3. Eaton v. BloodSupreme Court of Iowa · 1926
  4. Dunham v. CoxSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1908
  5. Regas v. HeliosWisconsin Supreme Court · 1922

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API