Legal Opinion

Rice v. O'Connor

New York Supreme Court

Decided May 15, 1860PublishedCited by 10 opinions

Appeal from an order sustaining demurrers to an answer. The complaint contained two causes of action. The first was, that the plaintiff, at defendants’ request, performed work and labor for them, and boarded their servants and hands; that after-wards the plaintiff and defendants accounted together, and upon' such accounting there was found due and owing for such work, labor, and board, from defendants to plaintiff, over and above all accounts, payments, and off-sets of…

Read the full summary

Appeal from an order sustaining demurrers to an answer. The complaint contained two causes of action. The first was, that the plaintiff, at defendants’ request, performed work and labor for them, and boarded their servants and hands; that after-wards the plaintiff and defendants accounted together, and upon' such accounting there was found due and owing for such work, labor, and board, from defendants to plaintiff, over and above all accounts, payments, and off-sets of defendants, the sum of §61.87, which defendants promised to pay to plaintiff; that defendants, though often requested, &c.,…

1Opinion of the Court

By the Court.*—Balcom, J.

Section153 of the Code contains this language“ The plaintiff may, in all eases, demur to an answer containing new matter, where upon its face it does not constitute a counter-claim 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 Code does not au*364thorize the plaintiff to demur to a defence consisting of denials merely, and he cannot demur for any cause not specified in the Code. (See Code, § 140.) The plaintiff can demur only when the new matter in the answer, upon its face,…

2Cited by10 opinions

  1. Merritt v. GouleyNew York Supreme Court · 1890
  2. McGuire v. LambIdaho Supreme Court · 1888
  3. John Church Co. v. ClarkeNew York Supreme Court · 1894
  4. Bernascheff v. RoethNew York Supreme Court · 1901
  5. C. N. Nelson Lumber Co. v. PelanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1885

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