Bank of Geneva v. Rice

New York Supreme Court

Bank of Geneva v. Rice

12 Wend. 424

DecidedJuly 15, 1834

StatusPublished

This text of 12 Wend. 424 (Bank of Geneva v. Rice) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bank of Geneva v. Rice, 12 Wend. 424 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1834).

Pincite

Opinion

The plaintiffs prosecuted their suit by Messrs. Sill and Kidder, as their attorneys; and in the commencement of the declaration, it was stated that the plaintiffs, by Sill and Kidder, their attorneys, complained, &c. The defendant demurred, insisting that the requirement of the statute, 2 R. S. 351, § 26, that a plaintiff “ shall state the name of the attorney or attorneys hy whom he appears” in-his declaration, had not been complied with. On a motion for judgment for the plaintiffs on the ground of the frivolousness of the demurrer, such judgment was ordered — the Court holding, that where two or more attorneys transact business together as a law firm, it is a sufficient compliance with the same statute in a declation filed by them, to state, as had been done in this case, the surnames of the attorneys, or rather the name of the firm ; and that it was not necessary that their Christian names should be set forth in the declaration.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

The plaintiffs prosecuted their suit by Messrs. Sill and Kidder, as their attorneys; and in the commencement of the declaration, it was stated that the plaintiffs, by Sill and Kidder, their attorneys, complained, &c. The defendant demurred, insisting that the requirement of the statute, 2 R. S. 351, § 26, that a plaintiff “ shall state the name of the attorney or attorneys hy whom he appears” in-his declaration, had not been complied with. On a motion for judgment for the plaintiffs on the ground of the frivolousness of the demurrer, such judgment was ordered — the Court holding, that where two or more attorneys transact business together as a law firm, it is a sufficient compliance with the same statute in a declation filed by them, to state, as had been done in this case, the surnames of the attorneys, or rather the name of the firm ; and that it was not necessary that their Christian names should be set forth in the declaration.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

12 Wend. 424, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bank-of-geneva-v-rice-nysupct-1834.