Frivolous

Is applied to an answer, plea, or objection which upon its face is clearly insufficient in law, and apparently made for purposes of delay or to embarrass an adversary. An answer is frivolous when it controverts no material allegation in the complaint, and presents no tenable defense; * when it sets up a matter which may be true in fact, but forms no defense. A sham or false answer may be good in form, but false in fact.= See Sham. To constitute a pleading frivolous, it must be ap- 1 Clark V. The Queen, 14 Q. B. D. 98 (1884), Grove, J.; Vagrant Act, 5 Geo. IV (1835), c.

83. 'Ibid. 101-2, Hawkins, J. s See 3 Bl. Com. 300- Herzberg v. Sachse, 60 Md. 438 (1883). *Lef Eerts v. Snediker, 1 Abb. Pr. o. s.

48 (1854); Brown v. Jennison, 3 Sandf. L. T32 (1851); Lerdall v. parent on mere inspection, without examination or research, that it is utterly invalid.' When it needs argument to prove that an answer or demurrer is frivolous, it is not frivolous. ' A pleading seen to be frivolous, upon bare inspection, will be stricken off by the court.'