Stent v. Continental National Bank
5 Abb. N. Cas. 88
Opinion
Under the old code the mode of pleading allowed an answer positively denying, when in fact that denial was simply on information, and so the verification could show. I do not understand the code as it now stands as allowing such a verification, and therefore, the denial on information must be in the answer, and so stated.
Motion denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Stent v. Continental National Bank, 5 Abb. N. Cas. 88 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1877).
5 Abb. N. Cas. 88 (Stent v. Continental National Bank) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Macauley v. Bromell & Barkley Printing Co.
67 How. Pr. 252 (City of New York Municipal Court, 1884)
Clark v. Dillon
15 Abb. N. Cas. 261 (New York Court of Common Pleas, 1882)