Busch v. Baker

Citations

• 79 Fla. 113
• 83 So. 704

Syllabus

<p>1. If a pleading in equity is wholly irrelevant or otherwise improper, it may be stricken on motion.</p> <p>2. A chancellor has inherent power of his own motion, to purge pleadings of prolixity, tautology, scandal and impertinence.</p> <p>3. Where a bill prays for specific performance of a contract to buy back certain land sold by defendant to complainant in part payment of corporate stock sold by complainant to defendant, it is error to strike out portions of the answer which tend to show that complainant induced the original transaction by falsely representing the stock to be fully paid.</p> <p>4. The maxim “He who comes into equity must come with clean hands” applies with peculiar force in an action for specific performance inasmuch as granting or withholding relief in such cases is within the sound judicial discretion of the court.</p> <p>5. The principle or policy of the law in witholding relief from a complainant because of “unclean hands” is punitive in its nature.</p> <p>6. Misrepresentation or concealment is not required to go to the extent of actionable fraud in order to justify a chancellor in his discretion, in refusing to grant specific performance of a contract induced thereby.</p> <p>7. Motion to strike a portion of an answer must not be too broad, for if the portion assailed contains any matter material to the issue, it should not be stricken.</p> <p>8. A defendant need not answer inferences of law drawn from the facts stated, nor need he answer immaterial or irrelevant ■ matter alleged in the bill.</p>