Legal Opinion

President, Directors, & Co. of the Bank of Auburn v. Weed & Aiken

New York Supreme Court

Decided January 15, 1822PublishedCited by 16 opinions

THIS was an action of assumpsit. The declaration contained two counts: the first count was against the defendants. ~ * as endorsers of a promissory note, dated the 7th of February, 1820, made by E. Throop, for 12,385 dollars, payable six-. ty-threé days after date, to the defendants, or their order, and endorsed by them.

Read the full summary

THIS was an action of assumpsit. The declaration contained two counts: the first count was against the defendants. ~ * as endorsers of a promissory note, dated the 7th of February, 1820, made by E. Throop, for 12,385 dollars, payable six-. ty-threé days after date, to the defendants, or their order, and endorsed by them. The second count was for money lent> money paid, &c. and money had and received to the use plaintiffs- The defendants pleaded : 1. Mon-assumpsit: 2. In bar, that the President, Directors, and Com-1 4 4 pany of the Bank of Auburn are not a body politic or cor- . * » . « - ; ,…

1Opinion of the Court

Spencer, Ch. J.

delivered the opinion of the Court. This case was before us on a former occasion, on a motion to set aside an inquest. To this plea the plaintiffs had replied, that the plaintiffs were a body politic and corporate, and have a right to sue; the defendants demurred to the replication. The plaintiffs, net regarding the demurrer, took an inquest; and we set aside the inquest, on the ground, that we could not say that the defendants had no right to plead such a plea. We held the replication to be bad; and therefore the demurrer was riot frivolous, or for delay ; and we granted the…

2Cited by16 opinions

  1. President of the Bank of Utica v. SmalleyNew York Supreme Court · 1824
  2. Stoddard v. Onondaga Annual Conference of the Methodist Protestant ChurchNew York Supreme Court · 1851
  3. Grays v. Turnpike Co.Court of Appeals of Virginia · 1826
  4. Graff v. MesmerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1878
  5. Finley v. QuirkSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1864

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API