Utica Insurance v. Scott

1 Lock. Rev. Cas. 394

Opinion

The Supreme Court held, that the replication was bad, for not traversing or denying these facts.

The Court of Errors held, that it was not necessary to traverse or deny those facts, as the facts replied in the in[395] ducement to the traverse, were sufficient to sustain the plaintiff’s action—and they reversed the judgment of the Supreme Court.

For reversal, 19 ,• aff. 7.

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

Utica Insurance v. Scott, 1 Lock. Rev. Cas. 394 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1799).

1 Lock. Rev. Cas. 394 (Utica Insurance v. Scott) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.