Shearman v. New York Central Mills
New York Supreme Court
Appeal from an order striking out answer as frivolous. This was one of three similar actions brought against the New York Central Mills. The complaints were upon promissory notes alleged to have been executed to the plaintiffs as the payees thereof, by an agent of the defendant thereto duly authorized. They contained the usual allegation of nonpayment, and demand of judgment for the amount thereof; and were duly verified.
Read the full summary
Appeal from an order striking out answer as frivolous. This was one of three similar actions brought against the New York Central Mills. The complaints were upon promissory notes alleged to have been executed to the plaintiffs as the payees thereof, by an agent of the defendant thereto duly authorized. They contained the usual allegation of nonpayment, and demand of judgment for the amount thereof; and were duly verified. The defendants put in the following answer in each case, verified by a director of the company: “ This defendant has no knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief…
1Opinion of the CourtPbatt, J.
I. I do not think that the answer in this case, made as it was by a corporation, was sufficient under the Code, were there no objection to it in matter of form. If a corporation may answer in this manner in one case it may in all cases. It is from its nature'under the necessity of acting by agents.
If therefore it were endowed with all the faculties of a natural person,, it would have no actual knowledge of any facts.
It could therefore in all cases deny knowledge or information. But a corporation is an artificial being which from its nature can have no knowledge or belief on any subject,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- King v. RayNew York Court of Chancery · 1844
3Cited by6 opinions
- McClave v. GibbThe Superior Court of New York City · 1895
- Clark v. DillonNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1882
- Macauley v. Bromell & Barkley Printing Co.City of New York Municipal Court · 1884
- Stockton v. KenneyNew York Supreme Court · 1898
- Warner v. United States Land & Investment Co.New York Supreme Court · 1889
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.