Myatt v. Saratoga County Mutual Insurance
New York Supreme Court
This is an action on a policy against loss by fire; -The defendant put in eight answers, and the plaintiff has demurred to the 1st, 2nd, 7th and 8th. And one answer given to the demurrers is, that the answers demurred to-do not contain any hew matter constituting a counter-claim; and that, therefore, the" plaintiff’s demurrers must be regarded as nullities.
1Opinion of the Court
Cady, Justice.
There has been, and still is, a difference of opinion, and have been contrary decisions, as to the question presented in this case, and I cannot claim that my own opinion has been uniformly the same as to a plaintiff’s right to demur to an answer not containing new matter constituting-a counterclaim.
The courts have not on all -occasions promptly noticed the rapid changes the legislature has made in the Code.
In Arthur agt. Brooks, (14 Barb. 533,) -sections 153 and 168 of the Code, as amended in 1852, were riot réferred to by the counsel or the court. The decision in that- case…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Arthur v. BrooksNew York Supreme Court · 1853
- Salinger v. LuskNew York Supreme Court · 1853