Robinson v. Fisher
This text of 3 Cai. Cas. 99 (Robinson v. Fisher) 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
Per curiam, delivered by
This is a dilatory P^ea’ L'-le definition of which is, that it only delays the suit by questioning the propriety of the remedy, rather than by denying ^1<3 'njury. Thus the injury complained of here, is not denied, but that it was committed with another. If it be a plea of this description, it wants the verification required by statute, and is therefore bad. Even as a plea in bar, I should not be for countenancing it, for it is totally out of the usual form of general issue which it was intended to try, and which would have answered as well, and furnished a record in the common form.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
3 Cai. Cas. 99, 1 Cole. & Cai. Cas. 452, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robinson-v-fisher-nysupct-1805.