Surplusage

In Accounts. A greater disbursement than the charges amount to. A balance over.

1 Lew. 219.

In Pleading. Allegations of matter wholly foreign and impertinent to the cause. All matter beyond the circumstances necessary to constitute the action is surplusage; 5 East 275; Allaire v. Ouland, 2 Johns. Cas. (N. Y.) 52; Kottwitz v. Bagby, 16 Tex. 656. Generally, matter of surplusage will be rejected and will not be allowed to vitiate the pleading; Co. Litt. 303 b; 2 Saund. 306, n. 14; Thomas v. Roosa, 7 Johns. (N. Y.) 462; Brown v. Manter, 21 N. H. 535, 53 Am. Dec. 223; as new and needless matter stated in an innuendo; Thomas v. Croswell, 7 Johns. (N. Y.) 272, 5 Am. Dec. 269; even if repugnant to what precedes; 10 East 142; but if it shows that the plaintiff has no cause of action, a demurrer will lie; 2 East 451; 2 W. Bla. 842; Wilson v. Codman’s Ex’r, 3 Cra. (U. S.) 193, 2 L. Ed. 408. Where the whole of an allegation is immaterial to the plaintiff’s right of action, it may be struck out as surplusage; sistent with what precedes, may be rejected as surplusage; Vail v. Lewis, 4 Johns. (N. Y.) 450, 4 Am. Dec. 300; and when the unnecessary matter is so connected with what is material that it cannot be separated, the whole matter may be included in the traverse; Dy. 365; 2 Saund. 206 a, n. 21; and the whole must be proved as laid; Adm’rs of Conn v. Ex’rs of Gano, 1 Ohio 483, 13 Am. Dec. 639; Steph. Plead. 422; but an averment, which is surplusage and can be stricken out without injury to the rest, will not vitiate a pleading; Hampshire Manufacturers’ Bank v. Billings, 17 Pick. (Mass.) 87. When words occur in a statute which can be given no effect consistent with the plain meaning of the statute they must be rejected as surplusage; U. S. v. Jackson, 143 Fed. 783, 75 C. C. A. 41.