Daley v. Mead
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Replevin, brought in a justice’s court, for 200 bushels of barley, of the value of $75. In his answer the defendant pleaded (among other things:) “Defendant denies that plaintiff is or was entitled to any portion of the 200 bushels of barley at any time, and denies the allegation that he had taken and did unjustly detain the same from plaintiff at any time.” On plaintiff’s motion the answer was stricken out, and judgment rendered for plaintiff.
Read the full summary
Replevin, brought in a justice’s court, for 200 bushels of barley, of the value of $75. In his answer the defendant pleaded (among other things:) “Defendant denies that plaintiff is or was entitled to any portion of the 200 bushels of barley at any time, and denies the allegation that he had taken and did unjustly detain the same from plaintiff at any time.” On plaintiff’s motion the answer was stricken out, and judgment rendered for plaintiff. On.appeal, on questions of law alone, to the district court for Rock county, judgment of reversal and for return of the property (which had been taken…
1Opinion of the CourtMitchell, J.
We think that the fair construction to be given to the imperfect and crude return of the justice in this case is that plaintiff’s motion was not an objection to defendant’s answer merely as not being “sufficiently explicit to enable him to understand it,” but amotion to strike it out as not containing any3 defence. If the return was so inaccurate as not to show the actual iacts, plaintiff should have moved for an amended one. While the answer is informal, as is usual with pleadings in justice’s court, yet we think it put in issue material allegations of the complaint, and contained a defence,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Terryll v. BaileySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1880
3Cited by3 opinions
- Robinette v. PriceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1943
- Higgins v. FieldsOregon Supreme Court · 1935
- Quammen v. SolbergSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1927