Hartley v. James
New York Supreme Court
Motion to strike out an answer as to one defendant for defective verification. The complaint in this action, and in another brought at the time, against the same defendants, by one Delafield, set up a con- tract on the part of Edward D. James and Sarah his wife, to convey a portion of the wife’s estate, and claimed damages against both for failure to fulfil the contract, and claimed also that the j udgment be enforced against the wife’s estate.
Read the full summary
Motion to strike out an answer as to one defendant for defective verification. The complaint in this action, and in another brought at the time, against the same defendants, by one Delafield, set up a con- tract on the part of Edward D. James and Sarah his wife, to convey a portion of the wife’s estate, and claimed damages against both for failure to fulfil the contract, and claimed also that the j udgment be enforced against the wife’s estate. The defendants answered jointly, and their answer was verified by the husband alone, in the usual form. The plaintiffs now moved in both cases to…
1Opinion of the CourtBarnard, J.
In both these cases plaintiff brings his action on a joint contract made by the two defendants to recover damages for the breach of it. If the wife is liable at all, she is jointly liable with her husband. Consequently, the verification by the husband is, I think, sufficient under section 15J of the Code. If the wife is liable at all, she is certainly united in interest with her husband, as they have a common interest in defeating a claim for damages made against both of them jointly for the breach of a joint contract executed by them. The fact that plaintiff asked as part of his relief to…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Paddock v. PalmerNew York Supreme Court · 1900