Pearce v. . Hitchcock
New York Court of Appeals
George Pearce and Henry Smith brought an action of debt in the New-York common pleas, against Andrew H. Hitchcock and others.
Read the full summary
George Pearce and Henry Smith brought an action of debt in the New-York common pleas, against Andrew H. Hitchcock and others. The declaration set forth that pursuant to the statute concerning “ attachments against absconding, concealed and non-resident debtors,” the plaintiffs procured from the proper officer a warrant directed to the sheriff of the city and county of New-York, commanding him to attach the real and personal estate of Israel D, Condit and Aaron Peck; that the process was duly executed; that for the purpose of procuring a discharge of the warrant, the defendants executed to the…
1Opinion of the Court
Jewett, Ch. J.
The main ground of the demurrer put in to the plaintiffs’ declaration is, that the suit is brought in the names of only two of thecae obligees named in the bond, insisting that a suit upon this bond cannot be sustained by an individual creditor named as an obligee, in his own name, without joining the others, if living.
At the common law this objection would be fatal, the rule being, that in suits on bonds or deeds, all the obligees or covenantees, if alive, must join as plaintiffs in bringing the action. (Cabell v. Vaughn, 1 Saund. 291, F. note 4; S. C. 1 Vent. 34; Vernan v.…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- D. & N. Arnold v. TallmadgeNew York Supreme Court · 1838
3Cited by5 opinions
- Simar v. . CanadayNew York Court of Appeals · 1873
- Stewart v. . Long Island R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1886
- Vandermulen v. . VandermulenNew York Court of Appeals · 1888
- Strohn v. Hartford Fire InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1873
- Montana Mining Co. v. St. Louis Mining & Milling Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1897