Vermilyea v. Fulton Bank
New York Court of Chancery
Selden, for complainant, moved that separate answers of the bank and Leavitt be taken off the files of this court, and that they file a joint answer.
1Opinion of the Court
The Chahcellor. :—It is now well settled, that officers of a corporation may be made parties to a bill of discovery, for the purpose of enabling the complainant to obtain a knowledge of facts which could not be ascertained by the answer of the corporation, put in under their corporate seal, and without oath. But what is to be the effect of that answer of *the agent or servant of the corporation, is a questian that does not seem to have received any formal adjudication in this court. If it is to be binding and conclusive upon the corporation, I can see no necessity for making the agent a party…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Jacksonville, Tampa & Key West Railway Co. v. Peninsular Land, Transportation & Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1891
- Beecher v. AndersonMichigan Supreme Court · 1881
- First National Bank of Miami v. Dade-Broward Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1936
- Lewis v. St. Albans Iron & Steel WorksSupreme Court of Vermont · 1878
- Akhurst v. National Starch Co.New York Supreme Court · 1909
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.