Mechanics' Banking Ass'n v. Spring Valley Shot & Lead Co.

13 How. Pr. 227
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedOctober 15, 1856
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 13 How. Pr. 227 (Mechanics' Banking Ass'n v. Spring Valley Shot & Lead Co.) 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
Mechanics' Banking Ass'n v. Spring Valley Shot & Lead Co., 13 How. Pr. 227 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1856).

Opinion

Clerke, Justice.

If the defendants are an incorporated company, it should be' so alleged in the complaint; and it should' he further alleged, that the note'was transferred in the ordinary course of business, by agents properly authorized. These facts must affirmatively appear, as essential constituents of the cause of action.

They do not merely show the manner in which the indorsement has been made, as a matter of evidence, but they constitute issuable facts, without proving which the plaintiffs cannot recover. (M'Cullough agt. Moss, 5 Denio, 567.)

The Code requires that the complaint must contain the facts constituting the cause of action. (§ 142.)

Judgment for defendants on demurrer, unless plaintiffs amend within twenty days, and pay costs of term,

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

Related

State v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.
56 N.W. 894 (South Dakota Supreme Court, 1893)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
13 How. Pr. 227, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mechanics-banking-assn-v-spring-valley-shot-lead-co-nysupct-1856.