Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

2 Or. 52

Robbins v. Baker

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided July 15, 1862

Oregon Supreme Court · decided 1862-07-15

This was an action on a promissory note, given by one E. N. Blanchet to the defendant, G. C. Bobbins, and after-wards indorsed by the defendant, Bobbins, to the plaintiff, Baker, who brings this suit against Blanchet and Bobbins, charging Bobbins as indorser. Bobbins answers, denying due demand for payment of the note from the maker, Blanchet, and also denying due notice to himself of non-payment.

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently October 1900

2 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1862-07-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Boise, C. J.

¶1The Statute, page 90, sec. 46, provides that the answer of a defendant shall contain a specific denial of each material allegation in the complaint according to his knowledge, information or belief, or of any knowledge or *53information sufficient to form a belief.” The answer in this case does not declare absolutely that the defendant has no knowledge of the matter controverted, but denies that he has sufficient knowledge to make up an opinion or form a belief. If the answer had contained the word any, used in the statute, and stated that he had not cmy knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief it would not have been a declaration that defendant had no knowledge whatever on the subject matter; it would have been a declaration briefly denying that any knowledge or information which he did possess was sufficient to enable him to form a belief. I think the form of expression used in- the answer conveys the same meaning; as though the language of the statute had been followed, and that the answer is sufficient.

¶2Judgment reversed.

/2/or/52 · .json · Public domain