Negative Pregnant

In pleading. Such a form of negative expression as may imply or carry within it an affirmative. Thus, where a defendant pleaded a license from the plaintiff's daughter, and the plaintiff rejoined that he did not enter by her license, the rejoinder was objected to successfully as a negative pregnant. Cro. Jac. 87. The fault here lies in the ambiguity of the rejoinder, since it does not appear whether the plaintiff denies that the license was given, or that the defendant entered by the license. Steph. Pl. 381. This ambiguity constitutes the fault (Hob. 295), which, however, does not appear to be of much account in modern pleading (1 Lev. 88; Comyn, Dig. "Pleader" [R 6]; Gould, Pl. c. 6, § 36).

In Pleading. Such a form of negative expression as may imply or carry within it an affirmative. Fields v. State, 134 Ind. 46, 32 N. E. 7SO. Thus, where a defendant pleaded a license from the plaintiff’s daughter, and the plaintiff rejoined that he did not enter by her license, the rejoinder was objected to successfully as a negative pregnant; Cro. Jac. 87. The fault here lies in the ambiguity of tho rejoinder, since it does not appear whether the plaintiff denies that the license was given or that the defendant entered by the license; Steph. PI. 381. This ambiguity constitutes the fault; Hob. 295; which, however, does not appear to be of much account in modern pleading; Com. Dig. Pleader (R 6); Gould, PI. c. 6, § 36. A special denial in the words of the allegation denied is a mere negative pregnant and a motion to make more definite and certain will lie; Moody v. Bolden, 60 ITun 582, 15 N. Y. Supp. 119. A mere denial in the language of the complaint, that a partial payment was made on a specified day, is an admission that the payment was made on some other day; Argard v. Parker, 81 Wis. 581, 51 N. W. 1012. A negative pregnant is not a good plea; U. 8. v. Larkin, 153 Fed. 113, 82 C. C. A. 247.

In pleading. A negative implying also an affirmative. Cowell. Such a form of negative expression as may imply or carry within it an affirmative. Steph. PI. 318; Fields v. State, 134 Ind. 46, 32 N. E. 780; Stone v. Quaal, 36 Minn. 46, 29 N. W. 326. As if a man be said to have aliened land in fee, and he says he has not aliened in fee, this is a negative pregnant; foe, though it be true that he has not aliened in fee, yet it may be that he has made an estate in tail. Cowell. As to negative "Covenant," "Easement," "Servitude," "Statute," and "Testimony," see those titles.

Defined under Negative in Black's Law Dictionary.

In pleading. A negative implying also an aflirmative. Cowell. Such a form of negative expression as may imply or carry within it an affirmative. Steph. Pl. 351. As if a man be said to have aliened land in fee, and he says he has not aliened in fee, this is a negative pregnang; for, though it be true that he has not aliened In fee, yet it may be that he has made an estate in tail. Cowell.

One v^hioh implies a denial not full, not covering the entire Negligentia semper habet infortunium gence always has misfortune for a companion.

In pleading, signifies the statement of a negative proposition in such a form as may imply or carry with it the admission of an ai Brmative. Thus, in an action of trespass for entering the plaintiff's house, the defendant pleaded that the plaintiff's daughter gave him license to do so, and that he entered by that license; to which the plaintiff replied, that he did not enter by her license. This replication was held to be a negative pregnant, inasmuch as it might imply or carry with it the admission that a license was given, although the defendant did not enter by that license; and the proposition would therefore, in the language of pleading, be said to be pregnant with that admission; viz., that a license was given. A negative pregnant is one of those faults in pleading which fall within the rule that pleadings must not be ambiguous or doubtful in meaning. In the above instance, the plaintiff should have denied either the entry by itself, or the license by itself; for the effect of denying both together was to leave it doubtful whether he meant to deny the license, or the fact of the defendant's entry by virtue of that license. Steph. on PI. 408, 409, 4th ed.

in pleading. Such form of negative expression, In pleading, as may imply or carry within it, an affirmative. This is faulty, because the meaning of such form of expression is ambiguous. Example: in trespass for entering the plaintitf’s house, the defendant pleaded, that — the plaintiff’s daughter gave him license to do so; and that he entered by that license. The plaintiff replied that he did not enter by her license. This was considered as a negative preonant, and it was held the plaintiff should have traversed the entry by itself, or the license by itself, and not both together. Cro. Jac. 87. It may be observed that this form of traverse may imply, or carry within it, that the license was given, though the defendant did not enter by that license. It is therefore in the language of pleading said to be pregnant with the admission, namely, that a license was given: at the same time, the license is not expressly admitted, and the effect therefore is, to leave it in doubt whether the plaintiff means to deny the license, or to deny that the defendant entered by virtue of that H. 6,7; ‘Hob. 295; Styles’s Reg. Negative Pregnant; Pl. 381; Gould, Pl. c. 6, § This rule, however, against a tive pregnant, appears, in times at least, to have received very strict construction; for cases have occurred in which, various grounds of distinction the general rule, that form of sion has been free from See several instances in Com. Pleader, (R 6.); 1 Lev. 88; Pi. 383.—V. Arch. Civ. Pl. Doct. PI. 317; Lawes’s Ciy. 114; Gould, Pl. c. 6, § 36.