Kelley v. Ryder
This text of 28 A. 801 (Kelley v. Ryder) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Rhode Island primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The rules of equity-pleading require that an answer should confess and avoid or expressly deny the allegations of the bill. Place v. The City of Providence, 12 R. I. 1. The answer of the respondents James J. Eyder and Catherine E. Eyder does not, in the particulars excepted to, comply with this requirement. Instead of expressly denying the allegations of the bill, it sets up matters of defence which deny the allegations of the bill only by implication. Prom such an answer it is difficult, if not practically impossible, to determine what are the real issues involved in the suit.
Exceptions sustained.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
28 A. 801, 18 R.I. 455, 1894 R.I. LEXIS 17, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kelley-v-ryder-ri-1894.