Scofield v. Van Syckle
New York Supreme Court
The complaint in this action was for the amount of a promissory note made by the firm of Taylor & Van Syckle, on the 30th July, 1853, to the order of John I. Hollister, for the sum of $1486, with interest from date, who, for a valuable consideration, indorsed and delivered the same to the plaintiffs, and demanded judgment against the defendant, Rensselaer W. Van Syckle for the sum of $682.87, with interest and protest, as the balance due thereon.
Read the full summary
The complaint in this action was for the amount of a promissory note made by the firm of Taylor & Van Syckle, on the 30th July, 1853, to the order of John I. Hollister, for the sum of $1486, with interest from date, who, for a valuable consideration, indorsed and delivered the same to the plaintiffs, and demanded judgment against the defendant, Rensselaer W. Van Syckle for the sum of $682.87, with interest and protest, as the balance due thereon. The defendant demurred to the complaint on the following ground : “ That there is a defect of parties defendants ; the cause of action being a joint…
1Opinion of the Court
By the court,
Leonard, Justice.
A complaint is not demurrable for defect of parties defendant, at law, unless it *98appears thereby that some other party for whose non-joinder the demurrer is interposed is living at the time the action is commenced.
The objection in such case must be taken by answer. (Brainard agt. Jones, 11 How. Pr. R., 569; Burgess agt. Abbott, 1 Hill R., 416; S. C. 6 Hill, 135; affirmed in court of errors.)
The order appealed from is affirmed, with costs, and judgment ordered for the plaintiff, unless the defendant answer in twenty days and pay the costs of demurrer and of this…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Brewer v. Michigan Salt Ass'nMichigan Supreme Court · 1885
- Palmer v. FieldNew York Supreme Court · 1894