Majority
Headnote
1. Pleading—Defenses in Answer.In the first nine paragraphs of the answer the defendant specifically admits or denies the several allegations of the complaint. Then follow four separate defenses and a counterclaifn. Each of these defenses and the counterclaim begins with a recital that the* defendant “reiterates all the admissions and denials contained in paragraphs i to 9 of this answer inclusive, and” alleges * * *. Motion is made to strike out the words in quotation. It is well settled, as contended by the defendant, that an affirmative defense or a counterclaim must be treated as a separate plea, and that, upon demurrer thereto, defendant is not entitled to the benefit of denials made elsewhere in the answer unless incorporated in the separate plea. Douglass v. Phenix Ins. Co., 138 N. Y. 209 , 33 N. E. 938 , 20 L. R. A. 118 , 34 Am. St. Rep. 448 ; Boyd v. McDonald (Sup.) 12 N. Y. Supp. 356 ; Roldan v. Power, 14 Misc. Rep. 480 , 35 N. Y. Supp. 697 . Moreover, “it is not essential that a separate count in an answer setting forth a counterclaim should contain in itself all the allegations requisite to a perfect counterclaim. It may refer to other parts of the answer or to the complaint, and the matters thus referred to are to be considered a part of the count as if written at length therein.” Cragin v. Lovell, 88 N. Y. 258 . But the defendant will not be permitted to incorporate by reference and plead irrelevant and redundant matter, and the same may be stricken out upon the motion of a person aggrieved thereby. Code Civ. Proc. § 545. In this case the reiterated recitals are irrelevant and redundant. The denials can be proven under the first nine paragraphs of the complaint, and their repetition does not strengthen the plaintiff’s pleading. They are not a necessary or proper part of the separate
The motion is granted, with $10 costs, defendant to serve an answer, amended in conformity with order entered hereon, within 5 days, after service of said order, plaintiff to reply or demur within 10 days after service of amended answer. Ordered accordingly.
Cases cited
- Douglass v. Phenix Insurance 138 N. Y. 209 p. 146
- Roldan v. Power 14 Misc. Rep. 480 p. 146
- Cragin v. Lovell 88 N. Y. 258 p. 146
- Uggla v. Brokaw 77 App. Div. 310 p. 147
- Stieffel v. Tolhurst 55 App. Div. 532 p. 147
- Waltham Manufacturing Co. v. Brady 67 App. Div. 102 p. 147
- Burkert v. Bennett 35 Misc. Rep. 318 p. 147
- Zacharias v. French 10 Misc. Rep. 202 p. 147