This article encompasses the common-law system of pleadings which contemplated successive pleadings in modification by each party until an issue was reached; which was assumed affirmative by one party and negative by another party. This process was to be in accordance, no matter what time was thus consumed. Under the code system of pleading, however, the objective is not so much to attain a narrow issue, but to have each party’s view of the facts on record as succinctly and as quickly as possible. This distinction in resolution led to a striking contrast in attitude with regard to the reply to the answer under the two systems. At common law, the duplication was an essential part of the social stratum of pleadings whenever the plea consisted of matter avoidance and confession, i.e., new matter. It was, however, one of a sequence of pleadings and is developed in turn by the rejoinder, the surrejoinder, the rebutter, the surrebutter and further pleadings, as necessary.  On the other hand, the scheme of the code was to delete the pleadings quite sharply at the reply or before. The plaintiff might reply to a new matter, as per the original code; but under several modern codes the reply either is unavailable or is available only in a restricted class of cases. The result is that the issue is more quickly interpreted under the codes, but is broader and a more general one in all probability.

Keywords: Rejoinder, Surrejoinder, Code of Civil Procedure

 Download Full Paper