A Treatise on the Law of Pleading and Practice; Under the Procedural Codes Adopted to Use in Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, Volume 2

A Treatise on the Law of Pleading and Practice; Under the Procedural Codes Adopted to Use in Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, Volume 2

By (author) 

List price: US$34.79

Currently unavailable

Add to wishlist

AbeBooks may have this title (opens in new window).

Try AbeBooks

Description

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1919 edition. Excerpt: ...can not be done on demurrer to the complaint, but must be by answer and proof.2 992. Statute Of Frauds--Presumption In Writing. In those cases in which the instrument declared on is shown from the face of the complaint to be within the statute of frauds, a failure to allege that it was in writing, may be taken advantage of by demurrer under this subdivision.1 But where the contract declared upon is void if not in writing, the court will assume, for the purposes of the demurrer, that it is in writing, though not so alleged.2 993. Statute Of Limitations--ExcusIng Delay. In those cases in which it appears on the face of the complaint that the demand is barred by the statute of limitations, a demurrer, either general or special,1 will be sustained; but the bar of the statute must l Hallock v. Jaudln, 34 Cal. 167, Randall v. Howard, 67 U. S. (2 175; Trull v. Moulton, 94 Mass. (12 Black.) 585, 17 L. Ed. 269. Allen) 396; Hitchcock v. Sawyer, 2 Miles v. Thorne, 38 Cal. 335, 39 Vt. 412. 337, 99 Am. Dec. 384. See Bren a Hallock v. Jaudin, 34 Cal. 167, nan v. Ford, 46 Cal. 8, 13; Reagan 175; Desmon v. Norris, 92 Mass. v. Justices' Court, 75 Cal. 253, 255, (10 Allen) 250; Beebe v. Hutton, 17 Pac. 195; Broder v. Conklin, 77 37 Barb. (N. Y.) 187; Lane v. Mul-Cal. 330, 336, 19 Pac. 513. lins, 1 Gale & D. 172; Bradley v. l Defense of laches appearing Bradley, 14 Mees. & W. 878; Hud-upon the face of the complaint, dleston v. Briscoe, 11 Ves. 596. which fails to set forth facts ex i Manning v. Pippen, 86 Ala. 357, cusing delay, may be set up by dell Am. St. Rep. 46, 5 So. 572; murrer, either general or special.--Dicken v. McKinley, 163 111. 318. 54 Kerfoot v. Billings, 160 111. 563, 43 Am. St. Rep. 741, 45 N. E. 134; N. B. 804; Sands v. St...show more

Product details

  • Paperback | 268 pages
  • 189 x 246 x 14mm | 485g
  • Rarebooksclub.com
  • Miami Fl, United States
  • English
  • black & white illustrations
  • 1236530780
  • 9781236530783