Emmens v. McMillan Co.
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
Appeal from an order of the General Term of the City Court of Few York- which reversed an order granted at Special Term' striking out certain paragraphs of the answer as irrelevant and redundant. Action to recover damages for the breach of an advertising contract;
1Opinion of the CourtBischoff, J.
A party may not insist as of right to have irrelevant or redundant matter expunged from the other’s pleading upon a motion for an order to such effect. The granting of the order rests in the discretion of the court (Code Civ. Pro., § 545; Town of Essex v. N. Y. & Can. R. R. Co., 8 Hun, 361; Homan v. Byrne, 14 Weekly Dig. 175), and. the moving party may be remitted to his objections upon the trial to the introduction of evidence in support of the alleged irrelevant matter.
A denial of such a motion does not involve the merits of the action or affect a substantial right (Field v. Stewart, 41…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- The People v. . the N.Y.C.R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1864
- Field v. StewartThe Superior Court of New York City · 1870
- Neresheimer v. BoweNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1882
3Cited by2 opinions
- Halliday v. BarberAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1902
- In re City of New YorkNew York Supreme Court · 1905