Brumly v. Westchester County Manufacturing Society

New York Court of Chancery

Brumly v. Westchester County Manufacturing Society

1 Johns. Ch. 366, 1815 N.Y. LEXIS 205, 1815 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 27

CourtNew York Court of Chancery

DecidedFebruary 27, 1815

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 1 Johns. Ch. 366 (Brumly v. Westchester County Manufacturing Society) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Chancery primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Brumly v. Westchester County Manufacturing Society, 1 Johns. Ch. 366, 1815 N.Y. LEXIS 205, 1815 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 27 (N.Y. 1815).

Pincite

Opinion

The Chancellor.

It does not appear that this is a bill merely for discovery of writings, as was the case in 1 Vern. 117. * and if it was, the case would not warrant the motion that the defendants named should swear to the very answer put in, on behalf of the corporation. The principle is established by that and by other cases, (Wych v. [367]*367Meal, 3 P. Wms. 310., and Dummer v. Corporation of Chippenham, 14 Ves. 245.,) that the court will call upon individual members of a corporation to answer not only with the rest under the common seal, but individually, upon oath; but in those cases the defendants, whose discovery under oath was sought, were named in the bill as defendants. The application, therefore, in its present shape, must be denied, with costs.

Motion denied.

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

The Chancellor.

It does not appear that this is a bill merely for discovery of writings, as was the case in 1 Vern. 117. * and if it was, the case would not warrant the motion that the defendants named should swear to the very answer put in, on behalf of the corporation. The principle is established by that and by other cases, (Wych v. [367]*367Meal, 3 P. Wms. 310., and Dummer v. Corporation of Chippenham, 14 Ves. 245.,) that the court will call upon individual members of a corporation to answer not only with the rest under the common seal, but individually, upon oath; but in those cases the defendants, whose discovery under oath was sought, were named in the bill as defendants. The application, therefore, in its present shape, must be denied, with costs.

Motion denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Johns. Ch. 366, 1815 N.Y. LEXIS 205, 1815 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 27, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brumly-v-westchester-county-manufacturing-society-nychanct-1815.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack