Oesterreicher v. Sporting Times Pub. Co.
City of New York Municipal Court
Action by Ignatz Oesterreieher against the Sporting Times Publishing Company, to recover the value of a printing plate made for the defendant. The -complaint fails to state whether the defendant is a corporation or an entity of any kind. The defendant demurs on the ground that the complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action.
1Opinion of the CourtMcAdaii, C. J.
The Code requires that, in an action brought by or against a corporation, the complaint must aver that the plaintiff or the defendant, as the case may be, is a corporation, and whether it is a domestic or foreign corporation, etc., (Code, § 1775;) and the omission of these allegations is ground ■of demurrer, (Baker v. Printing Co., 3 Month. Law Bul. 29; Clegg v. Newspaper Union, 8 Civil Proc. R. 401; Bank v. Doying, 11 Civil Proc. R. 61.) The cases relied on by the plaintiff (Fox v. Preserving Co., 93 N. Y. 54; Bank v. Corbett, 10 Abb. N. C. 86) are inapplicable. The first has no reference to…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Fox v. . the Erie Preserving CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1883
3Cited by6 opinions
- Canessa v. Kislak, Inc.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1967
- Bantam Books, Inc. v. MelkoNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1953
- A. Kaplen & Son, Ltd. v. Housing Authority of PassaicNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1956
- Frizen v. PoppyNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1952
- Rothchild v. Grand Trunk Railway Co. of CanadaNew York Supreme Court · 1890
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.