New York Supreme Court, 1895

Tuthill v. Goss

Tuthill v. Goss
New York Supreme Court · Decided July 26, 1895 · Pratt
35 N.Y.S. 136; 96 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 609 (New York Supplement)

Counsel

Calvin D. Van Name, for appellants., Thomas J. Ritch, for respondent.

Tuthill v. Goss

Opinion of the Court

PRATT, J.

The opinion at special term covers the questions so fully that further discussion is unnecessary. The statements in the eighth subdivision of the defendant’s pleading are appropriate for an answer, but out of place in a demurrer. They were therefore properly disregarded at special term, as not being properly before the court. The judgment must be affirmed, with costs, with leave to answer on payment of costs. All concur.

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