Brumly v. Westchester County Manufacturing Society
New York Court of Chancery
MOTION, on the part of the plaintiff, that the answer filed by the defendants be sworn to by Richard Ward, president, and John Bonnett, jun., secretary, of the said society, and by Philemon Halstead and Ichabod Pratt, directors thereof.
Read the full summary
MOTION, on the part of the plaintiff, that the answer filed by the defendants be sworn to by Richard Ward, president, and John Bonnett, jun., secretary, of the said society, and by Philemon Halstead and Ichabod Pratt, directors thereof. The motion was accompanied with an affidavit of the solicitor, stating that the bill was filed on the 14th of October last, and-'that on the 28 th of January last, the answer was filed under the seal of the defendants, and signed, by the president and secretary, but not sworn to.
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
It does not appear that this is a bill merely for discovery of writings, as was the case in 1 Vern. 117. * and if it was, the case would not warrant the motion that the defendants named should swear to the very answer put in, on behalf of the corporation. The principle is established by that and by other cases, (Wych v. *367Meal, 3 P. Wms. 310., and Dummer v. Corporation of Chippenham, 14 Ves. 245.,) that the court will call upon individual members of a corporation to answer not only with the rest under the common seal, but individually, upon oath; but in those cases the…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Board of Supervisors of Fulton County v. Mississippi & Wabash RailroadIllinois Supreme Court · 1859
- Beecher v. AndersonMichigan Supreme Court · 1881
- Wood v. Hartford Fire Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1839
- Rietz v. FoesteWisconsin Supreme Court · 1872
- Knox v. Protection Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1833
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.