N. Y., Lake Erie & Western Railroad v. Robinson
New York Supreme Court
Appeal by defendant from an order of the Special Term denying defendant’s motion to compel the plaintiff to reply to certain portions of the answer.
Read the full summary
Appeal by defendant from an order of the Special Term denying defendant’s motion to compel the plaintiff to reply to certain portions of the answer. This action was brought by the New York, Lake Erie- & Western Railroad Company against Charles Robinson to have certain shares of stock of the National Stock Yard Company, which had been delivered by defendant to the-Erie Railway Company or its receiver, declared to be unlawfully issued in the hands of defendant; to have a certain contract cancelled and surrendered up, and defendant enjoined from claiming any benefit under it; that defendant bead…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam [Van Brunt, P. J., Brady and Daniels J.J].
There seems to be ho good reason shown upon the papers presented on this record for requiring a reply to the answer herein, unless the rule is to be adopted that the court will require a reply to any new matter set up by way of defense.
The allegations as to the proceedings of the court in Illinois can be easily proven, if ■ true, by an exemplified copy of the record in that court, and no reply should be required.
The defense of the statute of limitations is one which the defendant must establish for himself, and the plaintiffs cannot be…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Arthur v. . Homestead Fire Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1879
- Equitable Life Assurance Society of United States v. CuylerNew York Court of Appeals · 1878
- Everitt v. . ConklinNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
- Burke v. ThorneNew York Supreme Court · 1864
- Cohn v. HussonCity of New York Municipal Court · 1883
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- O'Keefe v. Young & Rubicam, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1939