FAYERWEATHER v. UNITED DRESSED-BEEF CO.; ACHTER v. SAME; REYNOLDS v. SAME

FAYERWEATHER v. UNITED DRESSED-BEEF CO. ACHTER v. SAME. REYNOLDS v. SAME. (Circuit Court, S. D. New York. February 17, 1900.) Pleading — Answer—Repetition of Denials. The repetition in each of several separate defenses pleaded in an answer of denials of the allegations of the complaint is unnecessary, and on motion such denials, after the first, will be stricken out, as preventing the sufficiency of the defenses from being tested by demurrer. Motions to strike out certain specific denials repeated in each “separate” defense (subsequent to the first) set up in the answer Roger M. Sherman, for the motion. Emanuel J. Myers, opposed. [MAJORITY — LA.COMBE, Circuit Judge.] LA.COMBE, Circuit Judge. The defendant is needlessly alarmed. This court is not astute to overrule meritorious defenses upon any hypercritical refinements of pleading. If the various “defenses” set up in the new matter pleaded in the answer are legally sufficient, there is no likelihood of their being held bad, even on demurrer, because they do not repeat denials of the legal conclusions contained in the fourth, fifth, and sixth paragraphs. On the other hand, to add to each separate defense a denial of the diverse citizenship of the parties, of the death of Daniel B. Eayerweather, and of the relationship to him of the plaintiff would make it impossible to test the legal sufficiency of such separate defense by demurrer. The motion is granted.