Joseph Dixon Crucible Co. v. New York City Steel Works
New York Supreme Court
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
- Cook v. . WarrenNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
- Carpenter v. AdamsNew York Supreme Court · 1885
- Geis v. LoewThe Superior Court of New York City · 1873
- Webster v. BainbridgeNew York Supreme Court · 1878