Case Name: SCHMIDT v. McCAFFREY
Court: New York Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1901-05
Citations: 70 N.Y.S. 1011
Docket Number: 
Parties: SCHMIDT v. McCAFFREY.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 70
Pages: 1011–1012

Head Matter:
(34 Misc. Rep. 693.)
SCHMIDT v. McCAFFREY.
(Supreme Court, Special Term, Nassau County.
May, 1901.)
Pleading—General Denial.
A general denial cannot be stricken out as sham, under Code Civ. Proc. § 538, authorizing the striking out of “a sham answer or a sham defense.”
Action by George Schmidt against Robert McCaffrey. Motion to strike out answer as sham denied.
Edward L. Frost, for plaintiff.
. John B. Merrill, for defendant.

Opinion:
GAYUOR, J.
Section 538 of the Code of Civil Procedure is that "a sham answer or a sham defence may be stricken out," etc. This distinguishes an "answer" and a "defence'' as separate things in the terminology of pleading, whereas the term "answer" includes the term "defence," An answer may consist of a denial or denials only, or of a "defence" only, or of both. Code Civ. Proc. § 500. But a denial cannot be struck out as sham, i. e., false, but only a "defence." Wayland v. Tysen, 45 N. Y. 281. This serves to illustrate the. differ ence in terminology between a "denial" and a defence." The inexact and Unscientific language of the Code ought to be that a "defence" may be struck out as sham. There are no defences pleaded here, but only a general denial.
The motion is denied, with $10 costs.