Legal Opinion

Joseph Dixon Crucible Co. v. New York City Steel Works

New York Supreme Court

Decided September 5, 1870PublishedCited by 4 opinions

APPEAL from, an order refusing to strike out an answer as frivolous.

1Opinion of the Court

By the Gourt, In OR ah am, P. J.

The answer is clearly-had, and if the motion had been granted it would have - been difficult to find any good reason for reversing the order. But we do not think an order which denies a motion to strike out a pleading as frivolous, can be reviewed on appeal. It is not a substantial right to have it stricken out. On the contrary, it is a matter of discretion with the judge whether it shall be so stricken out or not.

The practice of allowing counsel to argue in favor of or against such a motion has been permitted, when the rule should be the other way. Under the…

2Cited by4 opinions

  1. Cook v. . WarrenNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
  2. Carpenter v. AdamsNew York Supreme Court · 1885
  3. Geis v. LoewThe Superior Court of New York City · 1873
  4. Webster v. BainbridgeNew York Supreme Court · 1878

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API