Minneapolis Threshing Machine Co. v. Colton

South Dakota Supreme Court

Minneapolis Threshing Machine Co. v. Colton

164 N.W. 971, 39 S.D. 433, 1917 S.D. LEXIS 167

CourtSouth Dakota Supreme Court

DecidedNovember 12, 1917

DocketFile No. 4174

StatusPublished

This text of 164 N.W. 971 (Minneapolis Threshing Machine Co. v. Colton) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering South Dakota Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Minneapolis Threshing Machine Co. v. Colton, 164 N.W. 971, 39 S.D. 433, 1917 S.D. LEXIS 167 (S.D. 1917).

Pincite

Opinion

WHITING, J.

Action to recover on promissory notes. Answer admitted execution of notes and alleged their payment. Such answer also set forth the facts which defendant claims amount to the alleged payment of these notes. Admitting that the allegation of payment rendered the answer good, the plaintiff interposed a demurrer to these allegations of facts from which defendant would 'have such payment found. Plaintiff contends these allegations are insufficient to constitute a defense. The trial court overruled the demurrer, and plaintiff appeals.

The action of the trial court -should be sustained. The allegations attached were not pleaded as a separate defense or counter-claim, but were allegations1 of probative facts, superfluous perhaps, -which allegations defendant saw fit to plead in connection with, and explanatory of, the allegation of payment, the material fact. But one defense was in fact pleaded, that of payment.

The order of the trial court is sustained.

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

WHITING, J.

Action to recover on promissory notes. Answer admitted execution of notes and alleged their payment. Such answer also set forth the facts which defendant claims amount to the alleged payment of these notes. Admitting that the allegation of payment rendered the answer good, the plaintiff interposed a demurrer to these allegations of facts from which defendant would 'have such payment found. Plaintiff contends these allegations are insufficient to constitute a defense. The trial court overruled the demurrer, and plaintiff appeals.

The action of the trial court -should be sustained. The allegations attached were not pleaded as a separate defense or counter-claim, but were allegations1 of probative facts, superfluous perhaps, -which allegations defendant saw fit to plead in connection with, and explanatory of, the allegation of payment, the material fact. But one defense was in fact pleaded, that of payment.

The order of the trial court is sustained.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

164 N.W. 971, 39 S.D. 433, 1917 S.D. LEXIS 167, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/minneapolis-threshing-machine-co-v-colton-sd-1917.