Schwarz Bros. v. Evening News Publishing Co.
Supreme Court of New Jersey
On motion to strike out answer.
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Swayze, J.
This is an action for libel. The complaint contains four counts. To this the defendants have interposed an answer of forty-three typewritten pages. The counsel who drew the answer have shown commendable care in the somewhat delicate task of dealing with the practice under the new act of 1913 (Pamph. L., p. 377), but it is obvious that if that act requires or even permits such an answer as this, it will so far from simplifying pleadings, make them intolerably prolix. I think the statute does not require pleadings to be put in this form, and…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Burt v. Advertiser Newspaper Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1891
- Haynes v. Clinton Printing Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1897
- Benton v. StateSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1896
3Cited by11 opinions
- Mick v. American Dental Assn.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1958
- O'Regan v. SchermerhornSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1946
- Salzano v. North Jersey Media Group Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 2010
- Bock v. Plainfield Courier-NewsNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1957
- Frega v. NORTHERN NEW JERSEY MTG. ASS'NNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1958
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.