
    C. D. Shean v. M. L. Gist et ux.
    Pleading — Sufficiency of Answer.
    . An answer, purporting to be a counter-claim and set-off which fails to specifically deny the allegations of the bill, held, not to be sufficient to avoid a judgment theretofore rendered by default.
    Same.
    It is not error to refuse the filing of an answer to a petition, at the succeeding term of the Court, at which judgment by default had been rendered.
    APPEAL PROM T-IARDIN CIRCUIT COURT.
    October 15, 1868.
    An action ordinary was instituted in February, 1866, against Shean by appellees to recover $1,050 rent on 104 acres of land for a period of five years, which Shean had in use, and in April, 1866, an amended petition, was filed, alleging an indebtedness of $1,075 for hire of personal property. At the June, 1866, term of court, the petition first filed was read, and no answer having been filed, judgment by default was rendered, and at the December term, 1866, no answer having been filed to the amended petition, judgment by default was rendered on that; on motion of defendant at the same term, this latter judgment was set aside, and a summons awarded him against plaintiffs to show cause why the judgment at the June term should not be set aside, and on the same day defendant filed his answer in which no denial is made of the alleged use of the land as- shown by the original petition, but says “he used a piece of land near by his own, which was worth about $25 per year, etc.,” and alleges as a set-off, numerous small improvements in the way of ditching, fencing, etc., but makes a positive denial, supported by affidavits, to the amended petition. Summons was issued against appellees on the defendants answer and counter-claim, which was sent to Jefferson county, but were not returned. In February, 1867, a motion was made by appellees for an attachment against the property of appellant to satisfy the 'judgment of June, 1866, and certain property levied on by the sheriff-to satisfy same. Whereupon an appeal is prosecuted by defendant, from said judgment of June, 1866.
    Shean, ITrinter smith, for appellant.
    
    
      Stirinan, for appellee.
    
   Opinion oe ti-ie Court by

Judge Robertson :

The failure to answer the petition in proper time authorized the judgment as rendered. There was no available error in refusing the answer when offered. It did not show the ground of the suit to which it referred, nor did it present on its own face any good ground for changing or suspending the judgment which the petition of the appellees was seeking to enforce.

We see no error in the judgment appealed from. It is therefore affirmed.  