Kelly v. Sammis
New York Supreme Court
Motion to make the first five subdivisions of the complaint more definite and certain, and to strike out all of the complaint after that as not irrelevant and redundant.
Read the full summary
Motion to make the first five subdivisions of the complaint more definite and certain, and to strike out all of the complaint after that as not irrelevant and redundant. The complaint is as follows: “ I. That on or about the 30th day of March, 1898, the plaintiff and defendant herein made and entered into a certain parol agreement, wherein the plaintiff promised and agreed to and with the said defendant to superintend and direct the making of certain repairs to a hotel at Baldwins, Long Island, known as the America House, to prepare such hotel for the accommodation of the public and to act as…
1Opinion of the Court
Gaynor, J.:
Instead of being a general denial the answer consists of five separate denials of parts of the complaint which each denial sets out and denies in haec verba. Each of these denials is a negative pregnant. It is pregnant with the substantial truth of the allegations professedly denied. The denial in haec verba of allegations containing dates, conjunctives and disjunctives, adjectives, and the like, must as a rule be consistent with the substantial truth of the allegations, in which case there is no denial (Flack v. O’Brien, 19 Misc. Rep. p. 401; Stuber v. McEntee, 142 N. Y. p. 206).…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Flack v. O'BrienNew York Supreme Court · 1897
- Green v. BrownNew York Supreme Court · 1898
- von Hagen v. Waterbury Manufacturing Co.New York Supreme Court · 1898
3Cited by6 opinions
- Dixon v. PruettNevada Supreme Court · 1919
- Mitnacht v. HawthorneNew York Supreme Court · 1900
- Laurie v. DuerNew York Supreme Court · 1899
- Pascekwitz v. RichardsNew York Supreme Court · 1902
- Hutchinson v. BienNew York Supreme Court · 1905
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.