Bailey v. Inglee
New York Court of Chancery
The defendants Inglee and wife brought a suit at law against the complainant and Rhodes and Balestier, who were formerly partners under the name or firm of J. Balestier & Co. on a note given by that firm to Mrs. Inglee before her marriage.
Read the full summary
The defendants Inglee and wife brought a suit at law against the complainant and Rhodes and Balestier, who were formerly partners under the name or firm of J. Balestier & Co. on a note given by that firm to Mrs. Inglee before her marriage. After the commencement of such suit Bailey filed his bill in this cause, alleging therein, among other things, that in 1827 he withdrew from the firm; that previous thereto Rhodes assumed the payment of the note ; and that on the complainant’s retiring from the firm, Balestier and Rhodes covenanted with him to pay and settle all the debts of the firm. The…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
Persons are .necessary parties when no decree can be made respecting the subject matter of litigation until they are before the court either as complainants or defendants; or where the defendants already before the court have such an interest in having them made parties, as to authorize those defendants to object to proceeding without such parties. There is also another class of cases where persons who are not absolutely necessary as parties may be made defendants at the election of the complainant. Thus, if a trustee has parted with the trust fund, the cestui que trust may…
2Cited by33 opinions
- Haggerty v. WagnerIndiana Supreme Court · 1897
- Robinson v. KindNevada Supreme Court · 1896
- Bennett v. MinottOregon Supreme Court · 1896
- Squire v. . OrdemannNew York Court of Appeals · 1909
- Derham v. . LeeNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.