Devlin v. Bevins
This text of 22 How. Pr. 290 (Devlin v. Bevins) 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.
Opinion
The motion, to strike out the reply must be granted, no counter-claim being set up by the answer.
The word “ defence” in section 154, is to be understood as meaning counter-claim.
Whether that meaning be given to section 154 or not, a reply cannot be permitted where no counter-claim is interposed by the answer, if full effect be given to section 168 of the Code.
The new matter set up in the answer, where it does not constitute a counter-claim, is to be deemed controverted by the adverse party, as upon a direct denial or avoidance, as the case may require. (Williams agt. Upton, 8 How. Pr. R., 205 ; Richtmeyer agt. Haskins, 9 How. Pr. R. 481; Myatt agt. Saratoga Mu. Ins. Co., 9 How. Pr. R., 488 ; Quin agt. Chambers, 1 Duer, 673.)
Costs of motion, $10, to the defendant, at the termination of the action.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
22 How. Pr. 290, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/devlin-v-bevins-nysupct-1861.