Anderton v. Wolf
New York Supreme Court
Appeal from an interlocutory judgment entered upon an order overruling the appellants’ demurrer. The demurrer to the amended complaint is based, first, on the ground that there is a defect of parties defendant, in that it appears upon the face of the complaint that there are nine directors of the defendant company, three of whom, namely, Webber, Myers and Doty are not joined as defendants; that there are three inspectors of election, of whom only two are joined as…
Read the full summary
Appeal from an interlocutory judgment entered upon an order overruling the appellants’ demurrer. The demurrer to the amended complaint is based, first, on the ground that there is a defect of parties defendant, in that it appears upon the face of the complaint that there are nine directors of the defendant company, three of whom, namely, Webber, Myers and Doty are not joined as defendants; that there are three inspectors of election, of whom only two are joined as defendants, and that certain promissory notes made by the defendant, Rudolph Aronson, which have been transferred by him, and the…
1Opinion of the CourtMacomber, J.
The fifth and second grounds of the demurrer come respectively under subdivisions six and seven of section 488 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and the particular objection or defect relied upon is required (by § 490) to be specifically pointed out. In respect to this requirement of the Code the demurrer is wholly defective. As to the first ground of the demurrer, it does not appear upon the face of the complaint that there was a third inspector of election, nor does it appear therein who were the owners and transferees of promissory notes alleged to have been executed by the defendant…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Greaves v. . GougeNew York Court of Appeals · 1877
- Sanders v. . Village of YonkersNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
- Wooster v. ChamberlinNew York Supreme Court · 1858