Trustees of the Village v. Forbes
New York Supreme Court
The complaint in this action is for alleged violations of the provisions of title 9, chap. 20, part 1, of the Revised Statutes, entitled u of excise, and the regulation of taverns and groceries.” The answer set up six different defences, or statements of defence.
Read the full summary
The complaint in this action is for alleged violations of the provisions of title 9, chap. 20, part 1, of the Revised Statutes, entitled u of excise, and the regulation of taverns and groceries.” The answer set up six different defences, or statements of defence. The second statement of defence was, on motion, stricken out as irrelevant, at the Special Term held in Monroe county on the first Monday of April last; on the next day after the order for striking out was entered, the plaintiffs noticed the action for trial at the circuit to be held in the county of Yates, On the third Monday of…
1Opinion of the CourtWelles, J.
I am entirely satisfied that the plaintiffs were irregular in going to trial while the appeal in question was pending and undetermined. The order was clearly appealable. It involved the question whether certain matters, put forth by the defendant in the form of an answer to the complaint, was a good bar to the action. The special term held them irrelevant, and struck them out as such. It was the right of the defendant to have the judgment of the general term on this question, before going to trial upon the other issues of fact made by the answer. I am asked to look into the pleadings to see…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Hoyt v. TerwilligerNew York Supreme Court · 1872