Majority
p. 60The People, Resp’ts, v. George W. Tunnicliffe, App’lt. (Supreme Court, General Term, Third Department, Filed September 21, 1889.)
Headnote
1. Pleading — Sufficiency of denial in answer.An answer denying “ the complaint in each and every allegation there'n contained,” is a good denial of all the allegations of the complaint.
2. Same — Frivolous answer.
Such an answer is not frivolous.
Appeal by defendant from an order of special term granting motion for judgment on the ground that the answer was frivolous.
Action to recover penalties under chap. 534, Laws of 1879, as amended by chap. 437, Laws of 1886, prohibiting the having certain kinds of trout in possession during certain seasons of the year. The complaint set up twenty violations of the law and demanded the accumulated penalties, viz.: $500, with costs.
The answer denied “ the complaint in each and every allegation therein contained.”
Plaintiffs’ attorney thereupon moved for judgment on the pleadings, on the ground of the frivolousness of the answer, as it did not contain a general or specific denial of the material allegations, of the complaint, which motion was granted, with costs.
C. P. Coyle, for app’lt; C. R. Patterson, district attorney, for resp’ts.
We are satisfied that the answer in this case was a good denial of all the allegations in the complaint. It denies the complaint in each and every allegation therein contained
This plainly means that the defendant denies all the allegations of the complaint.
Neither complaint nor answer were verified There was, there
p. 61
fore, no reason why the defendant should attempt any evasive denial.
We think that the answer was not frivolous. The order appealed from is reversed, with ten dollars costs and printing disbursements, and the motion for judgment on the frivolousness of the answer is denied, with costs.
Fish, J., concurs; Putnam, J., not acting.