pears for two or more defendants, only one copy of the complaint need be served upon him; and if, after service of a copy of the complaint upon him, as attorney for a defendant, he appears for another defendant, the last defendant must answer the complaint within twenty days after he appears in the action.(1) Substitute for part of 130, Co. Proc. See post, 824. (1) Mackay e. Laidlaw, 13 How. 129; Paine v. McCarthy, 3 T. & C. 755; 8. c., 1 Hun, 78; Engs r. Overing. 2 Code R. 79; Travis v. Tobias, 7 How. 90, (2) Ferris . Soley, 23 How. 422; Walsh v. Kursheedt, 8 Abb. 418; Luce 9. Trempert, 9 How. 212. 480. Consequence of failure. If the plaintiff's attorney fails to serve a copy of the complaint, as prescribed in the last section, the defendant may apply to the court for a dismissal of the complaint. New. See 821, 822, post. § 481. Complaint; what to contain. — The complaint must contain: 1. The title of the action, specifying the name of the court in which it is brought; (1) if it is brought in the supreme court, the name of the county, which the plaintiff designates as the place of trial;(2) and the names of all the parties to the action, plaintiff and defendant.(3) 2. A plain and concise statement of the facts, constituting each cause of action, without unnecessary repetition. 3. A demand of the judgment to which the plaintiff supposes himself entitled.(4) Co. Proc., 142, am'd. (1) Overrules Van Namee v. People, 9 How. 198; Merrill. Grinnell, 10 id. 31: Van Benthuysen v. Stevens, 14 id. 70. (2) Merrill v. Grinnell, 10 How. 32; Hotchkiss v. Crocker, 15 id. 336; Davison . Powell, 13 d. 288; Dorman. Kellam, 14 14. 184; s. c., 4 Abb. 202. (3) Overrules Hill v. Thacter, 3 How. 407. See Stanley v. Chappell, 8 Cow. 235: Murray . Church, 3 T. & C. 145; s. c., 1 Hun, 49; Wheelock v. Lee, 15 Abo. N. S. 24; Bonesteel w. Garlinghouse, 60 Barb. 335; Rockwell v. Marwin, 45 N. Y. 166; Johnson v. Ackerson, 3 Daly, 430. See ante, 451, and note to Voorhies' Code, 2 142. (4) See Graves v. Waite, 59 N. Y. 156; Hofheimer . Campbell, id. 269; Clare v. National City Bk., 14 Abb. N. 8. 326: Hale v. Omaha Nat. Bk., 49 N. Y. 626; Caswell . West, 3 T. & C. 383; Hopkins v. Lane, 4 id. 311; s. c., 2 Hun, 38; Waters v. Crawford, 2 T. & C. 602; Elmwood r. Gardner, 45 N. Y. 349; Degraw e. Elmore, 50 1d. 1; Ross v. Mather, 51 id. 108; Judge v. Hall,5 Lans. 69: Barclay v. Quicksilver Min. Co., 6 id. 25. Also, 10 N. Y. Leg. Obs. 281; 14 Abb. 150: 10 How. 50; 2 Duer, 674; 5 Sandf. 566; 11 Barb. 569; 321d. 92; 19 N. Y 271; 4 Bosw. 603: 17 Abb. 184: 7 N. Y. 478; 10 id. 363: 3 Duer, 632: 20 Barb. 455; 9 d. 158: 38 How, 97; 6 id. 269; 21 id. 296; 3 Abb. N. S. 197; 3 Sandf. 668: 11 1d. 202; 8 N. Y. 115; 10 Abb. 445. And see Walt's Code, note to 142; Voorhles' Code, Id. $482. [Amended, 1877.] When interlocutory and final judgment may be demanded. - In an action triable by the court, without a jury, the plaintiff may, in a proper case, demand an interlocutory judgment, and also a final judgment, distinguishing them clearly. New. $483. Causes of action to be separately stated. Where the complaint sets forth two or more causes of action, the statement of the facts constituting each cause of action must be separate and numbered. From Co. Proc., 167, am'd, and see rule 25. Wiles v. Suydam, 64 N. Y. 173; People v. Tweed, 63 id. 191; Benedict v. Seymour, 6 How. 298; Wood v. Anthony, 9 id. 78; Colton v. Jones, 7 Rob. 164; Corbin e. George, 2 Abb. 465; Hall v. McKechnie, 22 Barb. 244. $484. [Amended, 1877.] What causes of action may be joined in the same complaint. The plaintiff may unite, in the same complaint, two or more causes of action, whether they are such as were formerly denominated legal or equitable, or both, where they are brought to recover as follows: 1. Upon contract, express or implied.(1) 2. For personal injuries, except libel, slander, criminal conversation, or seduction.(2) 3. For libel or slander. 4. For injuries to real property.(3) 5. Real property, in ejectment, with or without damages for the withholding thereof. 6. For injuries to personal property.(4) 7. Chattels, with or without damages for the taking or detention thereof. 8. Upon claims against a trustee, by virtue of a contract, or by operation of law.(5) 9. Upon claims arising out of the same transaction, or transactions connected with the same subject of action, and not included within one of the foregoing subdivisions of this section.(6) But it must appear, upon the face of the complaint, that all the causes of action, so united, belong to one of the foregoing subdivisions of this section; that they are consistent with each other; and, except as otherwise prescribed by law, that they affect all the parties to the action: (7) and it must appear upon the face of the com. plaint, that they do not require different places of trial. Substitute for part of 167, Co. Proc. (1) Mappier v. Mortimer, 11 Abb. N. S. 455; Booth . Farmers', etc., Bank, 65 Barb. 457; Keep v. Kauffman, 36 N. Y. Supr. 141; aff'd, 56 N. Y. 332; Walters r. Continental Ins. Co., 5 Hun, 313. (2) Anderson e. Hill, 53 Barb. 238, overruling 15 How. 386; Howe r. Peckham, 10 Barb. 656; Henry v. Henry, 17 Abb. 411; McIntosh v. McIntosh, 12 How. 289. (3) Watts v. Hilton, 3 Hun, 66. (4) Rodgers v. Rodgers, 11 Barb. 595; Cleveland v. Barrows, 59 id. 364: Booth v. Farmers' Bank, 1 T. & C. 45. (5) Sortore v. Scott, 6 Las 271: Bonnell v. Wheeler, 3 T. & C. 557; s. c., 1 Hun, 332; Petrie v. Petre, 7 Lans. 90. (6) Tradesmen's Bank v. McFeeley, 61 Barb. 322; Austin e. Monroe, 4 Lans. 67; aff'd, 47 N. Y. 360; Wiles . Suydam, 64 id. 173; Sterne e. Herman, 11 Abb. N. S. 376: Van Liew . Johnson, 6 T. & C. 643; Schnitzer e. Cohen, 7 Hun, 665. (7) Hubbell v. Lerch, 58 N. Y. 237 thg 62 Barb. 295; Bonnell r. Wheeler, 3 T. & C. 557; s. c., 1 Han, 332: 1. 1; Silsbee v. Smith, 41 How. 418; s. c., 60 Barb. 372; Day e. Stone, 15 Abb. N. S. 137; Haines v. Hollister, 64 N. Y. 1; Strong v. Lee, 2 T. & C. 441; Schnitzer v. Cohen, 7 Hun, 665. For further collection of cases see Wait's Code, § 167, note; Voorhies' Code, id. § 485. [Stricken out in 1877.] § 486. [Stricken out in 1877.] ARTICLE SECOND. DEMURRER. 8xc. 487. Defendant must demur or answer. 488. When he may demur. 490. Demurrer to complaint must specify grounds of objection. 493. Defendant may demur to reply. 494. When plaintiff may demur to answer. 456. Demurrer to counterclaim, when defendant demands an af- 496. Demurrer to counterclaim must specify grounds of objection. - The 487. Defendant must demur or answer. only pleading, on the part of the defendant, is either a demurrer or an answer. Co. Proc., part of 143. The remainder is provided for in 520, post. 488. [Amended, 1877.] When he may demur. The defendant may demur to the complaint, where one or more of the following objections thereto appear upon the face thereof: 1. That the court has not jurisdiction of the person of the defendant.(1) 2. That the court has not jurisdiction of the subject of the action.(2) 3. That the plaintiff has not legal capacity to sue.(3) 4. That there is another action pending between the same parties, for the same cause.(4) 5. That there is a misjoinder of parties plaintiff. (5) 6. That there is a defect of parties, plaintiff or de fendant.(6) 7. That causes of action have been improperly united.(7) 8. That the complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. (8) Co. Proc., 144, am'd by adding subd. 5. (1) Nones v. Hope Mut. Ins. Co., 5 How. 96; s. c., 8 Barb. 541. (2) Wilson v. Mayor, 6 Abb. 6; s. c., 15 How. 500; Koenig v. Nott. 8 Abb. 384; s. c., 2 Hilt. 323; Hotchkiss . Elting, 36 Barb. 38. (3) Phoenix Bank v. Donnell, 40 N. Y. 410; Kennedy v. Cotton, 28 Barb. 59: Fulton F. Ins. Co. v. Baldwin, 37 N. Y. 648; Town. Lovelass, 4 Hun, 696; Wright v. Wright, 51 N. Y. 437; Seaton v. Davis, I T. & C. 91. (4) Bishop v. Bishop, 7 Rob. 194; Burrows v. Miller, 5 How. 51; Williams v. Ayrault, 31 Barb. 364; Auburn Bank v. Leonard, 20 How. 193. (5) See People v. Crooks, 53 N. Y. 648; Dudley v. Grissler, 37 N. Y. Supr. 412; Thurstone. Elmira, 10 Abb. N. S. 119; Barton v. Spels, 5 Hun. 60; Jackson v. Brookins, id. 530; Fuller v. Fuller, id. 595; Simar v. Canaday, 53 N. Y. 298. (6) Groesbeck v. Duns, comb, 41 How. 302; Zimmerman v. Schoenfeldt, 6 T. & C. 142; s. c. 3 Hun, 692; Hees v. Nellis, 65 Barb. 440; Finnegan v. Carraher, 47 N. Y. 493; Haines v. Hollister, 64 id. 1: Moore r. Hegeman, 6 Hun, 290. (7) Anderson v. Hill, 53 Barb. 238; Blossom v. Barrett, 37 N. Y. 434; and see 2 Walt's Pr. 450; Voorhies' Code, note to 144, subd. 5; Wiles v. Suydam, 64 N. Y. 173. (8) Allen v. Malcolm, 12 Abb. N. S. 335; Armour v. Leslie, 39 N. Y. Supr. 353; Grout v. Cooper, 5 Hun, 423; Dawley v. Brown, 91d. 461; Eno v. Mayor, 7 id. 320; Littell v. Sayre, id. 485; Mackey v. Auer, 8 id. 180. § 489. [Stricken out in 1877.] § 490. [Amended, 1877.] Demurrer to complaint must specify grounds of objection. The demurrer must distinctly specify the objections to the complaint; otherwise it may be disregarded. An objection, taken under subdivision first, second, fourth, or eighth of section four hundred and eighty-eight of this act, may be stated in the language of the subdivision; an objection, taken under either of the other subdivisions, must point out specifically the particular defect relied upon. First sentence Co. Proc., part of 145. Remainder new. People v. Crooks, 53 N. Y. 648; Haire v. Baker, 5 id. 357; Getty v. Hudson R. R. R. Co., 8 How. 177; Hoagland v. Hudson, id. 343; Hulbert v. Young, 13 id. 413; Johnson v. Wetmore, 12 Barb. 433; Fulton F. Ins. Co. v. Baldwin, 37 N. Y. 648. § 491. [Stricken out in 1877.] 492. Demurrer to all or part of the complaint; demurrer to part, and answer to part. The defendant may demur to the whole complaint, or to one or more separate causes of action, stated therein. In the latter case, he may answer the causes of action not demurred to. Co. Proc., 145, 2d sentence, consolidated with id., 151. Nicholl v. Fash, 59 Barb. 275 Hackley v. Draper, 4 T. & C. 614; Hale v. Omaha Nat. Bank, 48 N. Y. 626; Murphy r. Allerton, 7 Hun, 650; Jarvis r. Palmer, 11 Paige, 650: Stuyvesant . Mayor, id. 415; Matthews r. Beach, 8 N. Y. 173; Lord e. Vreeland, 24 How. 316; s. c., 13 Abb. 185; and see 5 How. 5; id. 206; 3 E. D. Smith, 369; 3 Paige, 273; 6 Johns. Ch. 214, § 493. Defendant may demur to reply. The de fendant may also demur to the reply, or to a separate traverse to, or avoidance of, a defence or counterclaim, contained in the reply, on the ground that it is insuffl cient in law, upon the face thereof. Substitute for Co. Proc., 155. Hackley v. Draper, 4 T. & C. 614; White r. Joy, 13 N. Y. 83; Halliday r. Noble, 1 Barb. 137. See Thomas t. Loaners' Bank, 38 N. Y. Supr. 466. 494. When plaintiff may demur to answer. The plaintiff may demur to a counterclaim or a defence consisting of new matter, contained in the answer, on the ground that it is insufficient in law, upon the face thereof. Id., part of 153. Merritt v. Millard, 5 Bosw. 645; Cobb v. Frazee, 4 How. 413; Welch v. Hazelton, 14 id. 97; Wait v. Ferguson, 14 Abb. 379; Peck e. Brown, 2 Rob. 129; Graham v. Dunnigan, 6 Duer, 629; s. c.4 Abb. 426; Arthur v. Brooks, 14 Barb. 533; Fettretch v. McKay, 47 N. Y. 426. See Arinour v. Leslie, 39 N. Y. Supr. 353; Murphy v. Allerton, 7 Hun, 650; Hackley v. Draper, 4 T. & C. 614. 495. [Amended, 1877.] Demurrer to counterclaim, when defendant demands an affirmative judgment. — The plaintiff may also demur to a counterclaim, upon which the defendant demands an affirmative judgment, where one or more of the following objections thereto, appear on the face of the counterclaim: 1. That the court has not jurisdiction of the subject thereof. 2. That the defendant has not legal capacity to recover upon the same. 3. That there is another action pending between the same parties, for the same cause. 4. That the counterclaim is not of the character specified in section 501 of this act. 5. That the counterclaim does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. New. See post, 509. See Armour v. Leslie, 39 N. Y. Supr. 353; Graham v. Dunnigan, 6 Duer, 629; s. c., 4 Abb. 426. § 496. [Amended, 1877.] Demurrer to counterclaim must specify grounds of objection. A demurrer, taken under the last section, must distinctly specify the ob jections to the counterclaim; otherwise it may be disregarded. The mode of specifying the objections is the same, as where a demurrer is taken to a complaint. See the note to the last section. |