Fielden v. Lahens
The Superior Court of New York City
This action was brought by Thomas Eielden, Daniel Campbell and William C. Pickersgill, survivors of Joshua Fielden, John Fielden and James Fielden, composing the firms of W. 0. Pickersgill & Go., of New York, and of Fielden Brothers & Co., of Liverpool, England, against Pierre Francois Lahens, Edward Ernest Lahens, and Louis Emile Lahens, survivors of Augustin Edouard Gaudard, composing the firm of J. Lahens and Company, of New York, and of Havre, France, seeking to charge…
Read the full summary
This action was brought by Thomas Eielden, Daniel Campbell and William C. Pickersgill, survivors of Joshua Fielden, John Fielden and James Fielden, composing the firms of W. 0. Pickersgill & Go., of New York, and of Fielden Brothers & Co., of Liverpool, England, against Pierre Francois Lahens, Edward Ernest Lahens, and Louis Emile Lahens, survivors of Augustin Edouard Gaudard, composing the firm of J. Lahens and Company, of New York, and of Havre, France, seeking to charge them as indorsers of three promissory notes, all made by one Alexander Caselli, .of New York, to the order of J. Lahens &…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court—Bosworth, Ch. J.
I. An important question presented by this appeal is, whether in an action on contract, commenced before the enactment of the Code against several persons as partners, the plaintiff can recover against either, without establishing a cause of action against all. z
It was settled before the Code, that in such an action if the evidence disclosed that there were too many, or too few, plaintiffs, or too many defendants, a nonsuit was inevitable.
The codifiers, in their note to section 230, (now 274,) state the existence of this rule, and the consequences arising from the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Laverty v. BurrNew York Supreme Court · 1828
- Wilson v. WilliamsNew York Supreme Court · 1835
- Rich v. HussonThe Superior Court of New York City · 1852
- Boyd v. PlumbNew York Supreme Court · 1831
- Joyce v. WilliamsNew York Supreme Court · 1835
3Cited by5 opinions
- National Park Bank v. German-American Mutual Warehousing & Security Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1889
- Nat. Park Bk. v. . G.A.M.W. S. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1889
- In re MaceNew York Surrogate's Court · 1880
- Lyon v. FitchThe Superior Court of New York City · 1892
- Treadwell v. LincolnNew York Supreme Court · 1889