President, Directors & Co. of Bank of America v. Pollock
New York Court of Chancery
The bill was filed to reach one hundred and forty shares of the capital stock of the Mechanics’ Bank in the City of New York.
Read the full summary
The bill was filed to reach one hundred and forty shares of the capital stock of the Mechanics’ Bank in the City of New York. The complainants, the president, of the Bank of America, showed by their bill: that Andrew Pollock had been one of their clerks and had previously to his absconding as therein and hereinafter mentioned, been so for about eight years, during a part of which time he acted as one of their bookkeepers, keeping the accounts of some of their dealers and, among others, of those whose surname or firm commenced with J. and among whom was the firm of Jarvis & Scrymser, with whom…
1Opinion of the Court
The Vice-Chancellor :
The objection of misjoinder of parties and that the defendants Sarah Pollock and Susan Pollock should be proceeded against separately is not well taken. The case of Fellows v. Fellows, 4 Co wen’s R. 682, is a decisive authority to show that, although they hold distinct moieties of the stock in controversy, they may, under such circumstances as exist here, be proceeded against jointly. Andrew Pollock is, for form sake, a proper party and the two sisters might have objected if he had not been made a defendant: on the ground, if on no other, that if they lose the stock they…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Thompson v. PerkinsU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1823
3Cited by7 opinions
- Riehl v. Evansville Foundry Ass'nIndiana Supreme Court · 1885
- Glidden Admx. v. GuteliusSupreme Court of Florida · 1928
- Pioneer Mining Co. v. TybergCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1914
- Preston v. MooreTennessee Supreme Court · 1915
- Legniti v. Mechanics & Metals National BankAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1919
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.