Gove v. Pettis
New York Court of Chancery
Demurrer by the defendant, Pettis, to a bill filed against him, together with W. Austin and B. Dyckman. Several causes of demurrer were expressed, and at the hearing, other objections to the bill were taken, ore tenus; all of which will be found stated in the opinion of the court. cited Mitford’s Pl. 42 ; Rule 17; 1 Barbour Ch. Pr. 44; 6 Paige, 239. cited 8 Paige, 73; 1 Barb. Ch. Pr. 106.
1Opinion of the Court
The Vice-Chancellor.
It is no longer a ground of demurrer, that the complainant omits to state in the bill, his occupation or addition.
The omission of the signature of solicitor or counsel is a cause for moving to take the bill from the files of the court. It is matter of practice, not of pleading ; and is not a proper subject for a demurrer.
I think otherwise of the omission to verify the bill, or to waive an answer on oath. The bill as served, is one not verified by the oath of the complainant, and yet it requires an answer on the oath of the defendant. By the 17th rule, if the bill do not…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- McElwain v. WillisNew York Court of Chancery · 1831