GAYNOR, J.:
The denial is frivolous. It is a negative pregnant. It does not deny each allegation of the designated paragraphs as required by the Code (§ 500), but only denies the allegations in gross "as alleged" therein. Now a denial of them "as alleged" therein does not deny their substance, and that is the only denial which satisfies the Code requirement. Paragraph II alleges that the purchases were "at various times" between certain specified dates, but if all at one time the complaint is good. Hence a restriction of the denial to the precise words and form of the complaint is not good. Such a denial is pregnant with the truth that the goods were purchased (Kelly v. Sammis, 25 Misc. 6; Laurie v. Duer, 30 id. 154; Pigot v. McKeever, 32 id. 45). Similar instances in this same paragraph could be pointed out. The answer is evasive.
The allegations of paragraph III are not material; and also that of paragraph IV (Hirschfeld v. Kalischer, 81 Hun, 606); and hence no issue can be raised on them.
The motion is granted.