Full text
R. L. Pratt v. W. B. Sparkman, impleaded, etc.
Gileillan, C. J.
It is evident that the part of the answer demurred to was not stated as in and of itself a defence, but that it was alleged as a part of the transaction set forth just preceding it, and not demurred.to. The fact that what precedes it is in one paragraph, and this matter in another, does not make it appear to have been set forth as an independent defence. • '
Order affirmed.