Innes v. Purcell — 8 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 318

Majority

p. 318

Five Cases. EDWARD S. INNES, Respondent, v. MARGARET PURCELL, Impleaded, etc., Appellant.

Headnote

Appeal—pleadings—making more definite — order made by defanM—not reviewable.

The Special Term ordered that the defendant’s answers be made more definite. After the expiration of the time to amend, the plaintiff moved, on notice, to strike out the answers, and for judgment. The defendant did not appear, and the motion was granted by default, and judgments entered for plaintiff. From these judgments defendant appealed. Held, that the order striking out the answers, having been granted by default, is not reviewable on appeal, and

p. 319

that, under such circumstances, the court would not regard the answers as reinstated, for the purpose of reviewing the orders to make the answers more specific.

Motion to dismiss appeal.

Mr. Vemill, for the motion.

Mr. Arnoux, for the appellant.

Opinion by Davis, P. J.

Donohue, J., concurred.

Appeal dismissed, with costs.