Case ID: disney-ohio_2/html/0434-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Gholson, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Edward J. Lewis v. Smith and Gilbert.
    (No. 9,945.)
    Although a general denial of indebtedness may not be a denial of all the material allegations of a petition yet, it would be going too far to entirely disregard such an answer and require no proof from the plaintiff.
    Special Term. — Submitted on petition and answer.
    
      The petition sets forth a transaction in which it appears that there was a settlement by which the defendants became possessed of certain drafts for £600, and £355, 11s. and 8d., in which the plaintiff was interested to the extent of $1,170, that in the collection of said drafts, to the extent of plaintiff’s interest, the defendants acted as the agent of the plaintiff, that the first draft was collected by the defendants, in the amount of $2,869 60, and the second remains unpaid; that of the amount so collected the plaintiff is entitled to $613 38, according to a proportion stated in the petition. This amount, it is said, has been demanded and payment refused, and a judgment for the amount, with interest, is asked.
    To the petition the defendants put in an answer, and “ deny that they are indebted to said plaintiff' in the, sum of $613 38, as stated in said petition upon the cause of action stated therein, or in any sum whatever.”
    The case having been set for trial, was submitted upon the pleadings without evidence.
    
      Mills & Hoadly, for plaintiff.
    
      Flamen Ball, for defendants.
   Gholson, J.

The plaintiff claims that the answer contains no denial of the allegations in the petition; that such allegations not being controverted, are to be regarded as admitted. Code, section 127.

The code requires that the answer shall contain “ a general or specific denial of each material allegation of the petition controverted by the defendant.” Code, sec. 92. Thereis clearly in this case no specific denial, but I am not satisfied that the answer may not be regarded as a general denial of all the material allegations in the petition. If it was the intention of the defendants, in the general form they have adopted, to deny the material allegations of the petition, and such intention may be inferred from any fair, construetion of the pleading, it would not be doing substantial justice, to render a judgment without any evidence. We are required to give pleadings a fair and liberal construction to accomplish the purposes of justice. On the contrary, if the plaintiff feels any doubt as to whether the allegations of his petition, or any of them, are really denied by the answer, he can apply to have the answer made more definite and certain. This has been frequently done as to such an answer as the present. But I think it would be going too far entirely to disregard such an answer and require no proof from the plaintiff'.

The judgment for the plaintiff' will, therefore, be refused, but the case may be withdrawn, either with a view to a motion, or to the production of evidence upon another setting for trial.