Cardeza v. Osborn

32 Misc. 46, 65 N.Y.S. 450
New York Supreme Court·Decided June 15, 1900·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

Gaynor, J.:

This motion is made under section 545 of the Code of Civil Procedure to strike out as “ irrelevant ” matter pleaded as a defence The matter designated constitutes all of the matter so pleaded except a small part of it which if left alone could be to no purpose whatever. Why it is not included in the motion does not appear. The motion must therefore be deemed one to strike out the so-called defence in its entirety. Such a motion cannot be made, even though the matter does not constitute any defence, as seems to be the case here. The Code provision for the striking out of irrelevant matter obviously does not contemplate the striking out of an entire cause of action or of an entire defence for stating insufficient facts to constitute a cause of action or a defence, but only the striking out of irrelevant matter stated in a good cause of action or defence. The remedy is by demurrer (Code Civ. Pro., § 494; Walter v. Fowler, 85 N. Y. 621). It would serve no purpose to refer to the cases apparently to the contrary. Most of them are old, and none of them are authoritative.

Motion denied.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cardeza v. Osborn, 32 Misc. 46, 65 N.Y.S. 450 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1900).

32 Misc. 46 (Cardeza v. Osborn) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Security Trust Co. v. Pritchard
123 Misc. 493 (New York Supreme Court, 1924)
Bulova v. E. L. Barnett, Inc.
14 Misc. 150 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1920)
Tierney v. Helvetia-Swiss Fire Insurance
129 A.D. 694 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1908)
Stroock Plush Co. v. Talcott
129 A.D. 14 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1908)
Noval v. Haug
48 Misc. 198 (New York Supreme Court, 1905)
Durst v. Brooklyn Heights Railroad
33 Misc. 124 (New York Supreme Court, 1900)
Cardeza v. Osborn
66 N.Y.S. 1128 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1900)