New Miami Shores Co. v. Duggan

160 A. 515, 109 N.J.L. 220, 1932 N.J. LEXIS 303
Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided May 16, 1932·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The judgment will be affirmed, for the reasons stated in the opinion of Judge Oliphant.

It may be well to add that the only affirmative defense set up in the answer is payment. The rule seems to be that novation may not be proved under a general denial, nor even under a plea of payment. The defense of novation is an affirmative defense in the nature of release and discharge, and must be pleaded in a similar manner as a basis of proof. 46 Corp. Jur. 634. However, the defense was considered on its merits by the trial judge, and it has been so considered here.

For affirmance — The Chiee Justice, Teenchakd, Pakkee, Campbell, Lloyd, Case, Bodine, Donges, Van Buskiek, Kays, Heteield, Deae, "Wells, Keeney, JJ. 14.

For reversal — -None.

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

New Miami Shores Co. v. Duggan, 160 A. 515, 109 N.J.L. 220, 1932 N.J. LEXIS 303 (N.J. 1932).

160 A. 515 (New Miami Shores Co. v. Duggan) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Thomson v. Calhoun
32 Fla. Supp. 21 (Dade County Small Claims Court, 1969)
Burns Mortg. Co. v. Fried
67 F.2d 352 (Third Circuit, 1933)