Case ID: nys_99/html/1142-12.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

MOOT et al., Respondents, v. BAILEY, Appellant.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.
    May 9, 1906.)
    Action by Adelbert Moot and others against Harlow W. Bailey.
   PER CURIAM.

Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion denied, •with $10 costs. Held, that the denial set forth in the fourth paragraph of the answer, being a necessary part of the affirmative defense therein alleged, should not have been stricken out. See Douglass v. Phoenix Ins. Co., 138 N. Y. 209, 33 N. E. 938, 20 L. R. A. 118, 34 Am. St. Rep. 448.

SPRING and KRUSE, JJ., dissent.