Herold v. Smith
California Supreme Court
Herold v. Smith, 34 Cal. 122 (Cal. 1867)
Sanderson
Herold v. Smith
Opinion of the Court
The plaintiff was not required, under the amendments of 1866, to deny the defendant’s counter claim in order to put Mm upon Ms proof. In respect to matter in avoidance and to counter claims, the rule is the same as before the amendments of 1866. Those amendments introduced a new pleading called a cross complaint. When the answer contains a
Order affirmed.
Mr. Justice Shatter expressed no opinion.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- PHILIP HEROLD v. JOHN L. SMITH
- Cited By
- 1 case
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Pleading—A Counter Claim, or Matter in Avoidance, set up in Answer.— A counter claim, or matter in avoidance, set up in answer, need not be denied by plaintiff, to put defendant upon his proof. The rule is the same as before the amendments of 1866. Idem—Cross Complaint.—When the answer contains a cross complaint, authorized by the amendments of 1866, it must he rejilied to, or the matters therein alleged will be taken as confessed.