Case Name: Rudolph A. Loewenthal, App'lt, v. The Philadelphia Rubber Works, Resp't
Court: New York Supreme Court, General Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1892-03-31
Citations: 45 N.Y. St. Rep. 332
Docket Number: 
Parties: Rudolph A. Loewenthal, App’lt, v. The Philadelphia Rubber Works, Resp’t.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York State Reporter
Volume: 45
Pages: 332–333

Head Matter:
Rudolph A. Loewenthal, App’lt, v. The Philadelphia Rubber Works, Resp’t.
(Supreme Court, General Term, First Department,
Filed March 31, 1892.)
Pleading—Motion to make definite.
Where the defense set up is sufficient so far as its general allegations are concerned, it is not the province of the court, on motion to make the answer definite and certain, to compel the allegation of the specific-facts which lead to the general conclusions alleged.
{Jackman v. Lord, 56 Hun, 193; 30 St. Rep., 507, followed.)
Appeal from order denying motion to make answer more definite and certain. .
G. C. Coffin, for app’lt; IIW. Jessup, for resp’t.'

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
It seems to us that the rule laid down in the case of Jackman v. Lord, 56 Hun, 192; 30 St. Rep., 507, disposes of this appeal.
There is no question but what the defense set up in the answer, as far as its general allegations are concerned, is sufficient, and, therefore, it is not the province of the court upon a motion to make the pleading more definite and certain to compel the allega tian of the specific facts which lead to the general conclusions alleged in the pleadings. This office is served by a bill of particulars, by which a party in a proper case is apprised of the particular facts which his opponent expects to prove, and being so apprised cannot be surprised at the trial.
The order should be affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.
Van Brunt, P. J., O'Brien and Ingraham, JJ., concur.