Bank of Orleans v. Skinner
New York Court of Chancery
This case came before the chancellor upon an appeal, by the defendant Skinner, from an order of the vice chancellor of the third circuit denying an application to dissolve an injunction, upon the matter of the bill only ; and also upon a cross appeal by the complainants from so much of the order as denied their application for leave to amend the bill.
Read the full summary
This case came before the chancellor upon an appeal, by the defendant Skinner, from an order of the vice chancellor of the third circuit denying an application to dissolve an injunction, upon the matter of the bill only ; and also upon a cross appeal by the complainants from so much of the order as denied their application for leave to amend the bill. The complainants had discounted a note drawn by the defendant Slason, who resided in Vermont, for the benefit and accommodation of Doane & Potter, who resided in the county of Washington. This note was endorsed by Doane & Potter, and also by…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
I think the objection that the bill was not properly verified to entitle the complainants to an injunction, is well taken. Where a corporation aggregate is complainant, the bill, from the necessity of the case, must be verified by some officer or agent of the corporation. In this case the counsel for the bank, as appears from the affidavit, was better acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case than the president and cashier, who resided in a distant part of the state and could not know any thing of the charges in the bill upon which the application for an…
2Cited by14 opinions
- Spurgeon v. RhodesIndiana Supreme Court · 1906
- New Jersey Photo Engraving Co. v. Carl Schonert & Sons, Inc.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1923
- Ballard v. Eckman & VetsburgSupreme Court of Florida · 1884
- Armstrong v. SanfordSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1862
- Hecker v. MayorNew York Supreme Court · 1865
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.