Hoyt v. Shelp — 20 Abb.N. Cas. 10

Majority

p. 10

HOYT v. SHELP.

N. Y. City Court, Special Term;

November, 1887.

Headnote

The rule allowing a party to serve an answer in lieu of a demurrer as an amended pleading,—reiterated.

Motion, for judgment on demurrer as frivolous.

S. A.c&jD.T. Noyes, for the plaintiff, and the motion cited Smith v. Laird, 44 Nun, 580.

Paddock & Camion, for the defendant, opposed.

This court has held that a party may amend his pleadings after service of a demurrer. Having done this within the time provided by law, the defendant’s practice is regular. The demurrer is superseded by the service of the answer.

Motion denied; no costs.