Cardeza v. Osborn

New York Supreme Court

Cardeza v. Osborn

32 Misc. 46, 65 N.Y.S. 450

CourtNew York Supreme Court

DecidedJune 15, 1900

StatusPublished

Cited by8 cases

This text of 32 Misc. 46 (Cardeza v. Osborn) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

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

Pincite

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

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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

32 Misc. 46, 65 N.Y.S. 450, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cardeza-v-osborn-nysupct-1900.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack