No, under court rules, you should admit what is obviously true or correct (and especially if it doesn't hurt you), and you also have to admit or deny line-by-line or allegation-by-allegation. However, you don't need to admit what you don't personally know. To give a quick example, let's say there are six allegations in a suit claiming that you breached a contract with a home contractor by failing to pay everything you owed (which you, in good faith deny). The allegations are:1) John Doe [that's you] owns a home at 1313 Mockingbird Lane2) Homes-r-Us is an LLC licensed to do home renovations.3) John Doe hired Home-r-us to renovate his home.4) Homes-r-us did all the work they were hired to do.5) John Doe breached the contract by failing to pay Homes-r-us the amount legally due them.6) Homes-r-us was damaged by John Doe's breach in the amount of $30,000.Your position is that they failed to do the work and that's why you didn't pay them. You answer as follows:1) Admitted [assuming they got your name and address right]2) Defendant lacks sufficient information and leaves Plaintiff to its proofs [you don't know for sure that they are an LLC or licensed, but just know what they told you--let them prove this]3) Admitted [if you did in fact hire them, it's true and you know this]4) Denied [you believe they did not do all the work]5) Denied [you feel you did not owe them all the money, because they breached by failing to do all the work]6) Denied [you don't agree that you owe them $30,000]