Case Name: People v. Tunnicliffe
Court: New York Supreme Court, General Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1889-09-21
Citations: 7 N.Y.S. 91
Docket Number: 
Parties: People v. Tunnicliffe.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 7
Pages: 91–91

Head Matter:
People v. Tunnicliffe.
(Supreme Court, General Term, Third Department.
September 21, 1889.)
Pleading—Answer.
An answer denying “the said complaint in each and every allegation therein-contained ” is not frivolous.
Appeal from special term, Warren county.
Action by the people of the state of New York against George W. Tunnicliffe for penalties for violating game laws of New York. Laws 1879, c. 534, § 19. After answer by defendant, plaintiff moved for judgment on the ground’ that such answer was frivolous. The court awarded judgment for plaintiff unless defendant amended his answer. Defendant appeals.
Argued before Learned, P. J., and Fish and Putnam, JJ.
Coyle & Cunningham, for appellant. Charles R. Patterson, Dist. A tty.,, for respondent.

Opinion:
Learned, P. J.
We are satisfied that the answer in this case was a good denial of all the allegations in the complaint. It denies the complaint in-each and every allegation therein contained. This plainly means that the-defendant denies all the allegations of the complaint. Neither complaint nor answer was verified. There was therefore no reason why the defendant should attempt any evasive denial. We think that the answer was not frivolous. The order appealed from is reversed, with $10 costs and printing disbursements, and the motion for judgment on the frivolousness of the-answer is denied, with costs.
Pish, J., concurs. Putnam, J., not voting.