Slauson v. Englehart
New York Supreme Court
THIS action was commenced to recover the amount of a promissory note alleged to have been made by the defendant, payable to the order of one William Groodwin, and by him indorsed to the plaintiffs. Issue was joined by the answer of the defendant, who by it denied all the allegations in the complaint.
Read the full summary
THIS action was commenced to recover the amount of a promissory note alleged to have been made by the defendant, payable to the order of one William Groodwin, and by him indorsed to the plaintiffs. Issue was joined by the answer of the defendant, who by it denied all the allegations in the complaint. In October, 1856, upon this issue, the cause was tried and resulted in a verdict for the plaintiffs, which was sustained at special term, but afterwards, in December, 1857, was set aside by the general term, and the cause again noticed for trial at the Monroe circuit, in April 18,59, at which…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Johnson, J.
The supplemental answer provided for by section 177 of the code is undoubtedly, in one sense, a substitute for the former plea puis darrien continuance in actions at law, as claimed by the plaintiffs’ counsel. But it is also in the same sense a substitute for the supplemental answer allowed under the former practice in suits in chancery. The general rule in actions at law was, that the plea puis darrien was a waiver of all former pleas, and made the only issue to be tried in the action. This was not so, however, when the latter plea was not inconsistent with the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Rayner & Hope v. DyettNew York Supreme Court · 1829
3Cited by7 opinions
- Holyoke v. . AdamsNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
- Murphy v. Plankinton BankSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1904
- Holyoke v. AdamsNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
- Brown v. RichardsonThe Superior Court of New York City · 1865
- Corbin v. KnappNew York Supreme Court · 1875
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.