Freeman v. Frank
New York Supreme Court
Demurrer to second defence in the answer. The complaint stated that on the’7th day of September, 1859, at Lenox, in the county of Madison, the defendant assaulted, and beat, and wrongfully and falsely imprisoned the plaintiff, and feloniously ravished her. Judgment was demanded for ten thousand dollars damages, besides costs.
Read the full summary
Demurrer to second defence in the answer. The complaint stated that on the’7th day of September, 1859, at Lenox, in the county of Madison, the defendant assaulted, and beat, and wrongfully and falsely imprisoned the plaintiff, and feloniously ravished her. Judgment was demanded for ten thousand dollars damages, besides costs. The second defence in the answer was as follows: “ And for a further answer to said complaint, defendant, by his said attorneys, shows, that at the Court of Oyer and Terminer, held in and for the county of Madison, in the month of September, 1859, and after the summons…
1Opinion of the CourtBalcom, J.
—The only authority for demurring to answers is contained in section 153 of the Code, and that is in these words: “ The plaintiff may, in all cases, demur to an answer containing new matter, where, upon its face, it does not constitute a counterclaim or defence ; and the plaintiff may demur to one or more of such defences or counter-claims, and reply to the residue of the counter-claims.”.The Revised Statutes contain this section: “A person sentenced to imprisonment in a state-prison for life, shall thereafter be deemed civilly dead.” (2 Rev. Stat., 701, § 20.) If the defendant was sentenced…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Dundee Mortgage & Trust Investment Co. v. HughesUnited States Circuit Court · 1884
- In re the Estate of HeyeNew York Surrogate's Court · 1933