
    Herbert L. and Harry J. Miles, Respondents, v. John Kuttner, Appellant.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Term,
    May, 1908.)
    Pleading — Amendments — Amendments by leave of court — Time for amendments — Amendments at the trial.
    Mew trial — Grounds — Ruling and instructions at trial — Ruling on application to amend pleadings.
    Where defendant files a verified answer to a verified complaint and upon the trial the plaintiffs move for judgment on the pleadings upon the ground that the answer does not deny the allegations of the complaint, it is error for the court to deny defendant’s motion to be allowed to amend the answer.
    Appeal by the defendant from a judgment in favor of the plaintiffs, rendered in the Municipal Court of the city of New York, seventh district, borough of Manhattan.
    Arthur Gutman, for appellant.
    Adolph M. Schwarz, for respondents.
   Per Curiam.

Plaintiffs filed a verified complaint and the defendant filed a verified answer herein. The plaintiffs’ attorney, on the day set for trial, moved for judgment on the pleadings upon the ground that the answer did not deny the allegations of the complaint. The defendant thereupon moved to be allowed to amend the answer, which motion was denied and judgment rendered in favor of the plaintiffs. This was error. The defendant should have been allowed to amend if his answer was insufficient. Munic. Gt. Act, § 166. '

Present: Gildersleeve, Giegerich and Greenbaum, JJ.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide event.  