From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kelsey v. Sargent

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Dec 8, 1885
3 N.E. 795 (N.Y. 1885)

Opinion

Submitted November 24, 1885

Decided December 8, 1885

J. Q. Van Voorhis for appellant.

Theodore Bacon for respondent.


If the answer is true the plaintiff will be defeated, because the defendant remains liable as guarantor upon certain obligations referred to in that pleading, but not described. It can make no difference whether the matter is left uncertain by general averments constituting an adverse claim, or by allegations of matter effectual only as a defense. In either case the plaintiff might require further information before trial, and whether it should be obtained from a more specific answer, or a bill of particulars, was for the Supreme Court to determine. ( Witkowski v. Paramore, 93 N.Y. 467.)

It follows that the appeal should be dismissed.

All concur.

Appeal dismissed.


Summaries of

Kelsey v. Sargent

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Dec 8, 1885
3 N.E. 795 (N.Y. 1885)
Case details for

Kelsey v. Sargent

Case Details

Full title:EDWARD J. KELSEY, Respondent, v . JAMES SARGENT, Appellant

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Dec 8, 1885

Citations

3 N.E. 795 (N.Y. 1885)
3 N.E. 795

Citing Cases

Posner v. Rosenberg. No. 1

Plaintiff demanded a bill of particulars of defendants' claim. The word "claim" is sufficiently broad to…

People v. Gilbert

People v. Flaherty, 162 N.Y. 532. I am, therefore, forced to the conclusion that defendant's request (a) is…