Knowles v. Gee
New York Supreme Court
Motion by the plaintiff to strike out a part of the defendant’s answer. The complaint alledged that at the time of committing the acts complained of, the plaintiff was the owner and in possession of a certain lot of land, with a crop of wheat growing thereon, under and by virtue of a deed of conveyance from the defendant; and that the defendant wrongfully and forcibly entered upon the said lot of land, and cut and carried away the wheat.
Read the full summary
Motion by the plaintiff to strike out a part of the defendant’s answer. The complaint alledged that at the time of committing the acts complained of, the plaintiff was the owner and in possession of a certain lot of land, with a crop of wheat growing thereon, under and by virtue of a deed of conveyance from the defendant; and that the defendant wrongfully and forcibly entered upon the said lot of land, and cut and carried away the wheat. The complaint claimed damages to the amount of the value of the wheat; and contained, in all, about two folios. The answer set up as a defence that the deed…
1Opinion of the CourtSelden, J.
The question presented by this motion is, how far the legislature, by its recent reforms of the practice and pleadings in the courts of this state, intended to abrogate the rules heretofore applied to pleadings in the courts of common law, and to substitute those which prevailed in the court of chancery. No more important question than this, in my judgment, can arise under our new system of legal proceedings; and *301none, the settlement of which will have a more material influence upon the convenient administration of justice in this state, while the present system continues.
It can not be denied…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Vermilye v. VermilyeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1884
- People v. WiseNew York Court of Sessions · 1885
- Watriss v. PierceSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1858