Legal Opinion

Russell v. Easterbrook

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided July 26, 1898PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Action by a receiver to recover the balance due upon certain shares of the capital stock of an insolvent corporation, brought to the Superior Court in New Haven County and reserved* by that court, Elmer, J., upon the plaintiff’s demurrer to a defense set up in the answer, for the advice of this court.

Read the full summary

Action by a receiver to recover the balance due upon certain shares of the capital stock of an insolvent corporation, brought to the Superior Court in New Haven County and reserved* by that court, Elmer, J., upon the plaintiff’s demurrer to a defense set up in the answer, for the advice of this court. The answer, after admitting that the defendant was a shareholder of record, that the shares had not been fully paid in, and that he had due notice of the call, and alleging want of information sufficient to form a belief as to certain other averments in the complaint, stated the following…

1Opinion of the CourtBaldwin, J.

The answer concludes with a statement that Edward H. Phipps ought to he made a co-defendant, and a demand that the plaintiff transfer to him the shares standing in the name of the defendant. An answer is a statement of defense. It is not its office to demand affirmative relief, unless upon a counterclaim; nor can it properly he made to take the place of a motion to cite in new parties. The defendant’s claim, therefore, that Phipps should be brought in, and a judgment rendered affecting his interests, was not put before the court in such a way as to call for any decision upon it.

The gist of…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Whitney v. ButlerSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
  2. Marlborough Manufacturing Co. v. SmithSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1818

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Salt Dome Oil Corp. v. SchenckSupreme Court of Delaware · 1945
  2. Broderick v. AdamsonNew York Supreme Court · 1933
  3. Freeman Appeal from Doings of CommissionersSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1899
  4. Lindner v. Utah Southern Oil Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1954
  5. Fell v. Securities Co. of North AmericaCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1917

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API