Shaw v. Jayne
New York Supreme Court
—Motion on the part of the defendants to strike out certain portions of the complaint as being redundant and irrelevant. The action is for false imprisonment.
Read the full summary
—Motion on the part of the defendants to strike out certain portions of the complaint as being redundant and irrelevant. The action is for false imprisonment. The complaint states, upon information and belief, that on or about the 5th day of February, 1849, the defendant, Morris Brown, issued and delivered to one Samuel R. Tuell, a deputy of the sheriff of the county of Steuben, an execution signed by said Brown, as attorney for Austin S. Jayne, the other defendant, which execution is in the words and figures following, that is to say: [The execution is then set forth in hcec verba, which is…
1Opinion of the Court
Welles, Justice.
Much as I deplore the spirit of innovation, which, for the last two sessions has seemed to govern the counsels of our Legislature on the subject of legal practice and pleading, I will not do them the injustice to believe that they ever intended to countenance such a form of pleading, in a simple action at law, as is here presented. The above statement of matters contained in the complaint is very much abbreviated, and yet enough appears to show that it contains all the ingredients of a bill of discovery. It is sworn to, and consequently the answer would have to be put in under…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Hendrix v. Manhattan Beach Development Co. & MarshallAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1917
- Ancell v. City of Cape GirardeauSupreme Court of Missouri · 1871
- Ring v. MitchellNew York Supreme Court · 1904
- Exner v. ExnerNew York Supreme Court · 1876