Michigan Court of Chancery, 1840

Clark & Tillinghast v. Saginaw City Bank

Clark & Tillinghast v. Saginaw City Bank
Michigan Court of Chancery · Decided December 2, 1840
1 Harr. Ch. 240

Counsel

E. C. Seaman, for complainants., S. G. Watson, for defendants.

Clark & Tillinghast v. Saginaw City Bank

Opinion of the Court

The Chancellor.

The defendants may plead to one part of the bill, and answer to another part; but these defences must clearly refer to separate and distinct parts of the bill. If the defendants have answered to any part of the bill to which they have pleaded, the answer overrules the pleai Mit. PL, 319, 320. (1)

The plea in this case, extends to all the discovery, and nearly all the relief prayed. In fact, the plea and answer appear to apply to the same parts of, and each to nearly the whole bill; the answer overrules the plea.

Plea overruled.

See James vs. Sadgrove, 1 Sim. & Stu., 4, 1 Cond. Eq. Ch. Rep., 3; Morrison vs. Turnour, 18 Ves., 175; Bowas vs. Carter, 4 Ves., 91; Bayley vs. Adams, 6 Ves., 586; Watkins vs. Stone, 2 Sim. & Stu., 560; 1 Cond. Eq. Ch. Rep., 588.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.