Moody v. Libbey
1 Abb. N. Cas. 154
Opinion
[After remarking that plaintiff had submitted no brief.]—I have come to the conclusion to deny the motion. Many of the matters sought to be stricken out by the plaintiff are good by way of justification, and those which are not, are good by way of mitigation, and as bearing upon the question of malice (Jeffras v. McKillop & Sprague Co., 2 Hun, 351; Bush v. Prosser, 11 N. Y. 347; Bisbey v. Shaw, 12 Id. 67; Steinman v. Clark, 10 Abb. Pr. 132).
Motion denied with $10 costs.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Moody v. Libbey, 1 Abb. N. Cas. 154 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1876).
1 Abb. N. Cas. 154 (Moody v. Libbey) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Bush v. . Prosser
11 N.Y. 347 (New York Court of Appeals, 1854)
Steinman v. Clark
10 Abb. Pr. 132 (New York Court of Common Pleas, 1859)