Hammond v. Earle
New York Supreme Court
Motion, by plaintiff to compel defendant to make a defense more definite and certain. This was an action by William A. Hammond against William P. Earle and Elmore P. Boss, for an injunction to stay the sale under foreclosure of certain premises in the city of New York ; for specific performance of a contract; that a mortgage be adjudged no longer a lien on said premises ; and for damages for breach of contract.
Read the full summary
Motion, by plaintiff to compel defendant to make a defense more definite and certain. This was an action by William A. Hammond against William P. Earle and Elmore P. Boss, for an injunction to stay the sale under foreclosure of certain premises in the city of New York ; for specific performance of a contract; that a mortgage be adjudged no longer a lien on said premises ; and for damages for breach of contract. The fifth defense in the amended answer of the defendant Earle was as follow's : “And this defendant as and for a separate answer and fifth defense to the action of the plaintiff…
1Opinion of the CourtLawrence, J.
The motion to make the answer more definite and certain, as stated in the notice of motion, is granted, with costs to abide the event (See Mattison v. Smith, 19 Abb. Pr. 288; Old Code, § 149; New Code, § 500; MSS. opinion of Van Brunt, J., in this case).*
Ante, p. 107.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Mattison v. SmithThe Superior Court of New York City · 1863
3Cited by5 opinions
- Whaley v. LawtonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1898
- Clark v. DillonNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1882
- Potter v. FrailNew York Supreme Court · 1884
- Clark v. DillonNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1882
- New York Coach & Auto Lamp Co. v. BrownNew York Supreme Court · 1913