Case Name: HAWES v. WELLS et al.
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1910-03-11
Citations: 122 N.Y.S. 252
Docket Number: 
Parties: HAWES v. WELLS et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 122
Pages: 252–252

Head Matter:
HAWES v. WELLS et al.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.
March 11, 1910.)
Pleading (§ 79 )—Answer—Sufficiency.
Any answer is good enough tor a bad complaint,
[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Pleading, Cent. Dig. § 160; Dec. Dig.. § 79. ]
Appeal from Special Term, New York County.
Action by Gertrude D. Hawes against Oliver J. Wells, impleaded',, etc. From an order granting a motion to strike out certain portions of the answer of defendant Wells, he appeals.
Réversed.
See, also, 121 N. Y. Supp. 380, 382.
Argued before CLARKE, McLAUGHLIN, LAUGHLIN* SCOTT, and DOWLING, JJ.
H. H. Snedeker, for appellant.
Gilbert Ray Hawes, for respondent.
For other cases see same topic & § numbes in Dec. & Am. Digs. 1907 to date, & Rep’r Indexes

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
We recently held that this complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. Any answer is. good enough for a bad complaint. Therefore this answer was good enough.
Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with $10 costs.