
    FROMME v. SOHWORER.
    (City Court of New York, General Term.
    December 27, 1899.)
    Pleading—Sham Answer.
    It is error to strike out as sham any answer which pleads payment of services sued for, and denies the quantity of services rendered and the reasonable value thereof as alleged in the complaint.
    Appeal from special term.
    Action by Herman Fromme against Albert Schworer. From an order striking out defendant’s verified answer as sham, he appeals. Eeversed.
    Argued before FITZSIMONS, C. J., and SCHUCHMAN and O’DWYER, JJ.
    Philbin & Beekman, for appellant.
    Fromme Bros., for respondent.
   SCHUCHMAN, J.

The answer denies the quantity of services rendered and the reasonable value thereof as alleged in the complaint. It further pleads payment. The issues raised have to be determined on a trial.

Order appealed from reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements to appellant, and the motion denied, with $10 costs to defendant. All concur.  