Hicks v. Green

California Supreme Court Jul 1, 1858Published

Before: Burnett, Terry

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the plaintiff was entitled to recover because the defendant's counterclaim was not specially pleaded and therefore inadmissible under the general issue.

Issues

Whether the evidence offered by the appellant was admissible under the general issue.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The defence sought to be established by the appellant was in the nature of a counterclaim, and should have been specially pleaded.”

“The evidence offered was not admissible under the general issue.”

Synopsis

Under a plea of the general issue, evidence of a counter-claim is not admissible, but should be especially plead.

Terry, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court—Burnett, J., concurring. The findings of the Court, which are supported by the evidence, fully establish the plaintiff’s right to recover. The defence sought to be established by the appellant was in the nature of a counterclaim, and should have been specially pleaded. The evidence offered was not admissible under the general issue.

Judgment affirmed.

More from California Supreme Court

People v. Wende (1979)
People v. Watson (1956)
People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996)
People v. Kelly (2006)
Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962)
Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001)
People v. Lewis (2021)
In Re Estrada (1965)
Denham v. Superior Court (1970)
People v. Marsden (1970)

Related research