Once A Defendant Could Plead To An
Action Of Assumpsit Just As Many Defences As He Chose; First, He Could
Deny the whole by pleading the general issue; then he could plead the
statute of limitations, infancy, accord and satisfaction,
And a dozen
other pleas, by which the plaintiff would be deprived of any clue to
the real defence. I suppose it was this practice of formal lying which
has given rise to the popular error that a lawyer is in the habit of
lying, or is obliged to lie, in his arguments. Many people do not know
the difference between pleading which is a process in writing to
bring the parties to an issue and the oral arguments of counsel in
courts. It is ridiculous to suppose that it is easy or profitable for
lawyers to make false statements in their arguments. The opposing
counsel is ready to catch at anything of the kind; and if he misstates
the evidence, the jury are aware of it; while if he states what is not
law, the court generally knows it. So there is no opportunity for
lying even if a lawyer should be so disposed. The practice in civil
actions as provided by the statutes of Minnesota is similar if not
actually the same to the New York code of practice. There is but one
form of action, called an action of contract. The only pleading on the
part of the plaintiff is, 1st, the complaint; 2d, the reply. On the
part of the defendant, 1st, demurrer; or 2d, the answer.
Enter page number
PreviousNext
Page 34 of 188
Words from 8707 to 8967
of 50597
