Miller v. Hughes
New York Supreme Court
Motion by plaintiff to strike out defendant’s answer, setting up the defence of usury, on information and belief, to a' promissory note, containing the certificate of defendant that it was business paper.
1Opinion of the Court
Scrugham, Justice.
The answer sets up new matter on information and belief. It is verified. The plaintiff moves to strike it out on the ground that it is sham, irrelevant, or frivolous. I do not think it either irrelevant or frivolous.
Where an answer states a sufficient defence upon the knowledge of the defendant, I think it would be unsafe to strike it out as sham, and especially since the statute allowing parties to be witnesses in their own hehalf; for the defendant would be allowed to testify in regard to it on the trial, and if contradicted, a better opportunity of eliciting the truth…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Westervelt v. MorrelleCity of New York Municipal Court · 1899
- Westervelt v. MorrelleCity of New York Municipal Court · 1899