Kain v. Larkin
| Decision Date | 30 January 1894 |
| Citation | 36 N.E. 9,141 N.Y. 144 |
| Parties | KAIN v. LARKIN et al. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from supreme court, general term, third department.
Action by Margaret Kain, as administratrix of David Kain, deceased, against Patrick Larkin and Maria E. Larkin, to set aside conveyances. From a judgment of the general term (20 N. Y. Supp. 938) affirming a judgment dismissing the complaint and denying a new trial, plaintiff appeals. Reversed.
G. R. Adams, for appellant.
F. A. & F. L. Westbrook, for respondents.
At the trial of this action, upon the defendants' motion, the court, without taking any proof, dismissed the complaint upon the ground that it did not state sufficient facts to constitute a cause of action. To this ruling and direction the plaintiff's counsel excepted. The appeal therefore presents but a single question, and that is whether, in law, the complaint was sufficient as a pleading to give the plaintiff a standing before the court sufficient to enable her to make out her case by proof if she could. The learned trial judge, as well as the general term, have apparently reached this conclusion upon the theory that this court, when the case was here on a former appeal, decided that sufficient facts had not been averred. Kain v. Larkin, 131 N. Y. 300, 30 N. E. 105. In this respect we think that the learned courts below have misapprehended the legal effect of that decision. A careful reading of the opinion of this court upon that appeal will show that we reversed the judgment then before us, rendered after a full trial, upon the ground that the facts and circumstances disclosed by the record, as it then appeared, did not sustain the findings and conclusion of the court which set aside, as void, the conveyance and transfer attacked, and not because the complaint was defective. It is true that in discussing the questions then before us, and in pointing out defects in the proof, it was remarked that certain facts had not been proved, nor alleged; but it is nowhere intimated that the complaint was defective, or that the necessary facts could not have been proven under it at the trial. Our decision proceeded upon the ground that the proofs, not the pleading, were defective and insufficient. It will be sufficiently favorable to the defendants to consider the complaint as now before us upon a general demurrer upon the ground that it does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. In such a case the demurrer cannot be sustained unless it appears, admitting all the facts alleged, that no cause of action whatever is stated. The demurrer cannot be sustained simply by showing that facts are imperfectly or informally averred, or that the pleading lacks definiteness and precision, or that material facts are only argumentatively averred. The pleading may be deficient in technical language or in logical statement; but, as against a demurrer or a motion of this character at the trial, the pleading will be deemed to allege whatever can be imputed from its statements by fair and reasonable...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Brinkley v. Casablancas
...be implied from its statements by fair and reasonable intendment.' (Condon v. Associated Hosp. Serv., 287 N.Y. 411, 414 citing Kain v. Larkin, 141 N.Y. 144, 151 The question for us is whether the requisite allegations of any valid cause of action cognizable by the state courts 'can be fairl......
-
Delan v. CBS, Inc.
... ... Assoc. Hosp. Serv., 287 N.Y. 411, 40 N.E.2d 230; Kain v. Larkin, 141 N.Y. 144, 151, 36 N.E. 9). The question is whether the requisite allegations of any cause of action cognizable by state courts "can ... ...
-
Frater v. Lawson-Calder
...pleading will be deemed to allege whatever canPage 3 be implied from its statements by fair and reasonable intendment". Kain v. Larkin, 141 N.Y. 144 (N.Y.C.A. 1894). The underlying complaint alleges five causes of action, which will be addressed individually:First and Second Causes of Actio......
-
Fast v. Whitney
... ... state a cause of action, the question presented is, whether, ... in law, the pleading is sufficient ( Kain v. Larkin, ... 141 N.Y. 144, 36 N.E. 9; Abbott v. Easton, 195 N.Y ... 372, 88 N.E. 572; Chism v. Smith, 210 N.Y. 198, 104 ... N.E. 131; ... ...