Case Name: BODINE v. WHITE
Court: New York Appellate Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1906-03-26
Citations: 98 N.Y.S. 232
Docket Number: 
Parties: BODINE v. WHITE.
Judges: Argued before SCOTT, P. J., and O’GORMAN and NEWBUR-GER, JJ.
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 98
Pages: 232–233

Head Matter:
BODINE v. WHITE.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
March 26, 1906.)
Pleading — Geneeal Denial — Sufficiency.
Where a general denial in an answer, though carelessly and inartifleially drawn, indicates with sufficient clearness the pleader’s intention to put all the allegations of the complaint in issue, it is in compliance with Code Civ. Proc. § 500, requiring a denial of each material allegation of the complaint controverted by the defendant.
[Ed. Note. — For cases in point, see vol. 39, Cent. Dig. Pleading, §§ 244, 255.]
Appeal from City Court of New York" Trial Term.
Action by Dorothy K. Bodine against Frederick R. White. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff, and from an order denying a new trial, defendant appeals.
Reversed.
Argued before SCOTT, P. J., and O’GORMAN and NEWBUR-GER, JJ.
Warren, Warren & O’Beirne (L. E. Warren, of counsel), for appellant.
Daniel O’Reilly and K. Henry Rosenberg, for respondent

Opinion:
SCOTT, P. J.
The purpose of denials in an answer is to advise the plaintiff just what allegations of the complaint are intended to be put in issue. In matters of form the pleading must be literally construed, so as to carry into effect the intent- of the pleader. The general denial, sought to be set up in the first paragraph of the answer in this case, although carelessly and. inartifically drawn, indicates with sufficient clearness the pleader's intention to put all the allegations of the complaint in issue, and is therefore a compliance with section 500 of the Code.
Judgment reversed, and new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide the event.
All concur.