Legal Opinion · Dissent

Slate v. Eastman

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided December 30, 1922No. File No. 5103Published

1Dissent

SMITH,. J.

(dissenting). I regret that I am unable to concur in the conclusion reached by my associates in this case. I agree that the answer in abatement of the action is defective and demurrable. Appellant, however, attempted to plea-d an extension of the time of payment of the note sued on, but failed to state facts legally sufficient. This renders the answer dem-urrable, but defendant still had the right to amend his answer if the facts warranted it. The striking out of the answer and entry of judgment deprived him of that right, and I.think was error. I am of the view that the oral…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Consolidated Coal Co. v. PeersIllinois Supreme Court · 1896
  2. Clark v. Jeffersonville RailroadIndiana Supreme Court · 1873
  3. Wefel v. StillmanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1907
  4. Burns v. ScooffyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
  5. First National Bank v. CochranSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1906

11 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