Philips v. Prescott
New York Supreme Court
Motion by the defendant to set aside the judgment and subsequent proceedings in the action for irregularity, &c.—The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
Read the full summary
Motion by the defendant to set aside the judgment and subsequent proceedings in the action for irregularity, &c.—The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. William Clark, counsel for defendant, insisted in support of the motion, that in order to authorize the clerk to enter judgment on failure to answer, there must be proof before the clerk that no answer has been received: that in this case there was not only an entire absence of such proof, but, on the contrary, there was positive proof that an answer had been received : that the question is not whether the answer is a regular one—of…
1Opinion of the Court
T. R. Strong, Justice.
The grounds of irregularity specified in the notice of motion are the following: 1. That no proof was filed that an answer had not been received. 2. That an answer was served within the time allowed by law for answering.
It appears by the papers on the motion that the summons in the action was served on the 5th of June : that on the 26th of June an answer denying each and every allegation in the complaint, signed by the defendant in person, and verified by him on that day, was served on the plaintiff’s attorneys: that the answer was on the same day returned by the…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Pritchard v. HuntingtonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1863