Freeman v. Barrowcliffe
The Superior Court of New York City
Appeal from order overruling demurrer The action was brought against John M. Falconer and Richard Roe, whose real name was unknown to the plaintiff, composing the firm of John M. Falconer & Co., as makers of two promissory notes. The defendant John M. Falconer appeared and answered, and a verdict having been rendered against him, judgment was entered and perfected against both defendants.
Read the full summary
Appeal from order overruling demurrer The action was brought against John M. Falconer and Richard Roe, whose real name was unknown to the plaintiff, composing the firm of John M. Falconer & Co., as makers of two promissory notes. The defendant John M. Falconer appeared and answered, and a verdict having been rendered against him, judgment was entered and perfected against both defendants. Subsequently the appellant Henry M. Barrowcliffe, was served with a summons requiring him to show cause why he should not be bound by said judgment. He thereupon demurred to the complaint in the action on…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.—Freedman, J.
The summons requiring Barrowcliffe to show cause why he should not be bound, was issued pursuant to section 379 of the old code, which forms part of a chapter relating to proceedings against joint debtors, &c., &c., and remaining still in force, notwithstanding the enactment of the new code.
*318By section. 375 of the said chapter, it is provided that when a judgment shall be recovered against one or more of several persons, jointly indebted upon a contract, those who were not originally summoned to' answer the complaint may be summoned to show cause why they should not…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Mills v. ThursbyNew York Supreme Court · 1856