Legal Opinion

Rothschild Bros. v. Redman

New York Supreme Court

Decided December 29, 1947Published

1Opinion of the CourtDeyo, J.

A general denial is insufficient to put in issue the items constituting a plaintiff’s cause of action for goods sold and delivered in respect to delivery, performance, reasonable value or agreed price, where the complaint is drawn in compliance with section 255-a of the Civil Practice Act. (Bertolf Brothers, Inc. v. Leuthardt, 261 App. Div. 981; Anderson v. City of New York, 258 App. Div. 588; Raymond v. Davy, 160 Misc. 388.) Therefore, a bill of particulars may not be required concerning such items which are presumed to stand admitted in *1042the absence of specific denials. (Dairymen’s League…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Innis, Pearce & Co. v. G. H. Poppenberg, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1925
  2. Anderson v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1940
  3. Bertolf Bros. v. LeuthardtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1941
  4. Dairymen's League Co-operative Ass'n v. Levy Dairy Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1929
  5. Raymond v. DavyCity of New York Municipal Court · 1936

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

Powered by the Exa API