Briggs v. Bergen
New York Court of Appeals
Motion to dismiss an appeal from an order made at general term in the Supreme Court, affirming an order made at special term, striking out an answer as sham, frivolous and false. Under which of these categories the answer was held to come in the court below, did not, it would seem, appear from the papers used on the motion in this court, otherwise than by an inference from the terms of the order appealed from.
1Opinion of the CourtSelden, J.
The practice in regard to frivolous answers, demurrers and replies is regulated by section 247 of the Code, which provides that the party aggrieved may apply, upon a notice of five days, to a judge out of court, for judgment, and that “judgment may be given accordingly.” The frivolous pleading in such cases is not stricken out, but remains upon the record, and becomes a part of the judgment-roll. An appeal may be taken from the judgment in such' cases, from the special to the general term, and from thence to the Court of Appeals. But the manner of dealing with sham and irrelevant answers is…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Kenyon v. City of IndianapolisIndiana Superior Court · 1872
- Pymm v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1906