Case Name: Thomas Cavanagh, Adm'r, Resp't, v. The Oceanic Steam Navigation Co., App'lt
Court: New York Supreme Court, General Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1890-12-29
Citations: 35 N.Y. St. Rep. 992
Docket Number: 
Parties: Thomas Cavanagh, Adm’r, Resp’t, v. The Oceanic Steam Navigation Co., App’lt.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York State Reporter
Volume: 35
Pages: 992–992

Head Matter:
Thomas Cavanagh, Adm’r, Resp’t, v. The Oceanic Steam Navigation Co., App’lt.
(Supreme Court, General Term, First Department,
Filed December 29 1890.)
Pleading—Sham allegations.
Allegations in a pleading which are manifestly false may properly be stricken out as sham. The rules of pleading are liberal enough to enable any party truthfully to raise any issue without requiring that resort should be had to manifestly false allegations.
Motion for re-argument. For former opinion see 33 N. Y. State Eep., 903.
Thos. P. Wickes, for motion; Lawrence Godkin, opposed.

Opinion:
Van Brunt, P. J.
The learned counsel for the plaintiff is entirely mistaken in supposing that due deliberation was not held before the decision in this case was announced because of the large number of other cases which were decided at the same time. We see no reason to modify anything that was said in that opinion, which, in our opinion, characterized in none too harsh terms what seems to us to be reckless swearing to a pleading of the most reprehensible kind. The rules as to the verification or the method of allegation and denial in pleadings are liberal enough to enable any party truthfully to raise any issue without requiring that resort should be had to manifestly false allegations.
The motion for new trial should be denied, with ten dollars costs.
Daniels, J.
I agree that this is not a case for a re-argument It was fully considered, and the verification conspicuously proper.
Brady, J., concurs.