Corbin v. George
New York Supreme Court
Motion that defendants be required to make their answer more definite and certain. This action was brought by the plaintiff, Eleanor Corbin, as executrix of Timothy Corbin, deceased, against John and Alfred George, to recover the amount due on a contract for the sale of real estate, made by the deceased with the defendants. The answer contained four defences.
Read the full summary
Motion that defendants be required to make their answer more definite and certain. This action was brought by the plaintiff, Eleanor Corbin, as executrix of Timothy Corbin, deceased, against John and Alfred George, to recover the amount due on a contract for the sale of real estate, made by the deceased with the defendants. The answer contained four defences. The plaintiff moved for an order requiring the defendants to make their answer definite and certain, claiming that a certain portion of the answer was so indefinite or uncertain, that the precise nature of the defence was not apparent.…
1Opinion of the CourtBalcom, J.
The answer contains four distinct defences to the action, and they are separately stated as required by 86 Rule of this court: but they are not numbered as they should have been according to said rule. The objection that the defences are not numbered is technical in this case, as they are separately stated, so neither the plaintiff nor the court can be embarrassed in considering them. If the plaintiff’s attorney had seriously desired, that the defences should be numbered, he should have returned the answer with the objection, that the several defences therein, were not numbered according to…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Tifft v. TifftNew York Supreme Court · 1847
- Bates v. LoomisNew York Supreme Court · 1830