Legal Opinion

Stanbery v. Baker

New Jersey Court of Chancery

Decided February 15, 1897PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Oh bill &c. On motion to strike oht demurrer as frivolous.

1Opinion of the Court

Emeky, V. C.

This motion to strike out a demurrer is made upon the ground that it is frivolous, uncertain and without merit. The motion cannot be considered as made under the two hundred and thirteenth rule, allowing objections to any pleading to be made upon motion, for such motion, under this rule, is one which is made in lieu of a demurrer or exception, and is a waiver of demurrer or exception by the express provision of the rule. The rule, therefore, does not authorize a motion to strike out a demurrer. Nolan v. Nolan (Chancellor McGill, MS., Conclusions). The notice of motion here does…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Mershon v. CastreeSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1895
  2. Bowman v. MarshallNew York Court of Chancery · 1841

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. South Camden Trust Co. v. StiefelNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1927
  2. Scarano v. ScaranoNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1942
  3. Drumm v. PavlickNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1948

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

Powered by the Exa API