McFarland, Dodge & Co. v. Lester
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Black Hawk District Court. - Plaintiffs filed their petition, duly verified, claiming about six hundred dollars upon a promissory note made by defendants to plaintiffs, dated April 4, 186T, due one day after date..
Read the full summary
Appeal from Black Hawk District Court. - Plaintiffs filed their petition, duly verified, claiming about six hundred dollars upon a promissory note made by defendants to plaintiffs, dated April 4, 186T, due one day after date.. The action w'as commenced on the 9th of May, and on the 29th they answered, “ that of the truth of-no allegation contained in the petition have the defendants knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief, wherefore they ask that petitioners be required to prove the same.” This answer was duly verified. Plaintiffs moved to strike it from the files, as frivolous,…
1Opinion of the CourtWright, J.
language eleadot»: answer. This answer was verified, and is in .the allowed by the Revision (§ 2880). Thu£ a material issue was formed, and plaintiffs, before they could recover, were' bound to prove the material allegations of their complaint. If this is so, then defendants made or presented a substantial defense to plaintiffs’ cause of action. Beyond the answer there was no showing. To hold it frivolous, the rule is that its insufficiency must be so glaring that the court can say by its mere inspection that it does not contain any defense to any part of the complaint. The eomplaint is not…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Edwards v. LentNew York Supreme Court · 1852
- Caswell v. BushnellNew York Supreme Court · 1852
- Genesee Mutual Insurance v. MoynihenNew York Supreme Court · 1850
- Leach v. BoyntonNew York Supreme Court · 1856
- Rae v. Washington Mutual InsuranceNew York Supreme Court · 1851
3Cited by2 opinions
- McPhail & Co. v. HyattSupreme Court of Iowa · 1870
- Clark v. DillonNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1882