Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

116 N.Y.S. 676

Heilperin v. Levy

New York Supreme Court

Decided January 19, 1909

New York Supreme Court · decided 1909-01-19

<p>1. Pleading (§ 318*)—Bill of Particulars of Defense.</p> <p>, A bill of particulars of the defense of payment will not be ordered.</p> <p>[Ed. Note!—For other cases, see Pleading, Cent. Dig. § 969; Dec. Dig. § 318.*]</p> <p>2. Pleading (§ 318*)—Bill of Particulars.</p> <p>A bill of particulars as to a defense will not be ordered, when the answer consists simply of denials of plaintiff’s allegations of ownership of the bond and mortgage sued on.</p> <p>[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Pleading, Cent. Dig. § 969; Dec. Dig. § 318.*]</p>

Motion for a bill of particulars denied · Decided 1909-01-19

ERLANGER, J.

¶1Particulars of the defense of payment cannot be ordered. Barone v. O’Leary, 44 App. Div. 418, 60 N. Y. Supp. 1131. As to the other matters, the allegations are merely in effect denials of plaintiff’s allegations of ownership of the bond and mortgage referred to in the complaint. Particulars will not be ordered when the answer is merely a refutation of plaintiff’s assertions, nor will a party be required to disclose his evidence. Smith v. Anderson, 126 App. Div. 24, 110 N. Y. Supp. 191. In a proper case, a copy of an instrument will be ordered to be given; but this is not such a case.

¶2Motion denied.

/116/nys/676 · .json · Public domain