Legal Opinion

Flood v. Reynolds

New York Supreme Court

Decided July 15, 1856PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Motion for judgment on account of frivolousness of answer. The action is brought against the maker and indorsee of a promissory note. The complaint states the making of the note by the defendant Reynolds; that it was indorsed by the other defendant and transferred to the plaintiff; and that when it became due and payable, it was presented for payment and duly protested for non-payment.

Read the full summary

Motion for judgment on account of frivolousness of answer. The action is brought against the maker and indorsee of a promissory note. The complaint states the making of the note by the defendant Reynolds; that it was indorsed by the other defendant and transferred to the plaintiff; and that when it became due and payable, it was presented for payment and duly protested for non-payment. The answer of the defendant Reynolds, the maker of the note, after admitting that he had made the note and delivered it to the other defendant, states, that whether or not the other defendant indorsed the note…

1Opinion of the Court

Harris, Justice.

Under the 149th section of the Code, as amended in 1852, the defendant may deny a material allegation in the complaint, or, in a proper case, instead of denying *113the allegation, he may deny that he ■ has any knowledge or information in respect thereto sufficient to form a belief. When he can do this, the answer is complete, and the allegation is put in issue without any further denial.

The plaintiff’s counsel is mistaken when he supposes that, having stated that, in respect to the allegation in question, he has no knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief, the…

2Cited by6 opinions

  1. Cumins v. Lawrence CountySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1890
  2. Law Trust Society v. HogueOregon Supreme Court · 1900
  3. Batterman v. Journal Co.New York Supreme Court · 1899
  4. Wakelee v. DavisU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1892
  5. Cumins v. Lawrence CountySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1892

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API