Polaris Building Corp. v. Bimberg

The answer of the defendants Bimberg and Sehor alleges, upon information and belief, the making, for a valuable consideration, of the extension agreement therein referred to, without notice to or consent by the defendants. The only reference to this alleged agreement in the answering affidavit of Bimberg is that “ the plaintiff * * * did extend, without the knowledge or consent of the defendants, the time of payment on the mortgage because the mortgagee happened to be a friend of his” (sic). The allegation “ for a valuable consideration ” is not a statement of fact but a mere conclusion of…