Case ID: nys_4/html/0099-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "McAdam, O. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Kelly v. Woman Pub. Co.
    
      (City Court of New York, Special Term.
    
    October 8, 1888.)
    Corporations—Actions—Pleading—Verification.
    Under Code Civil Proc. N. V. § 525, subd. 1, requiring the pleadings of domestic corporations to be verified by an officer thereof, a verification by one who stated in the affidavit that he was “the former president of the defendant;” that all the officers, including deponent, had tendered their resignations; and that “no other officers have yet been elected or chosen in their places, ”—is insufficient.
    Motion by defendant, the Woman Publishing Company, to compel plaintiff to accept an answer served by it; also a counter-motion by plaintiff to vacate a stay of proceedings heretofore granted, and for leave to enter judgment for want of an answer. Defendant is a domestic corporation, and is sued for a balance of rent. It served an answer in due time, verified by one Edward Goodenough, which verification, omitting formal parts, was as follows: “Edward Goodenough, being duly sworn, says that he is the former president of the defendant; that all the officers of the defendant, including deponent, tendered their resignations from office in said defendant prior to the commencement of this action, and no other officers have yet been elected or chosen in their place; that the foregoing answer is true,” etc. Plaintiff refused to accept this answer, on the ground that it was not properly verified. Hence this motion.
    
      H. Huffman Browne, for defendant. Charles H. Johnson, for plaintiff.
   McAdam, O. J.

The Code requires that a verification of a pleading by a domestic corporation must be made “by an officer thereof.” Code, § 525, subd. 1. A verification by an ex-officer is unauthorized and insufficient; hence the plaintiff was under no obligation to accept the answer tendered, and the motion to compel him to accept it will be denied. The decision of this motion makes it unnecessary to decide the counter-motion made by the plaintiff. If the plaintiff enters judgment, the corporation may, upon the proper application, be heard as to the validity of the service made. PTo motion having as yet been made to test the validity of the service, that question cannot now be determined. PTo costs.