Case Name: Empire State Pickling Co., Inc., and Others, Plaintiffs, v. Walter J. Bennett and Others, Defendants
Court: New York Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1929-12-31
Citations: 135 Misc. 482
Docket Number: 
Parties: Empire State Pickling Co., Inc., and Others, Plaintiffs, v. Walter J. Bennett and Others, Defendants.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Miscellaneous Reports
Volume: 135
Pages: 482–483

Head Matter:
Empire State Pickling Co., Inc., and Others, Plaintiffs, v. Walter J. Bennett and Others, Defendants.
Supreme Court, Ontario County,
December 31, 1929.
Abbott, Rippey & Hutchens, for the plaintiffs.
Earle S. Warner, for the defendants.

Opinion:
Rodenbeck, J.
The proposed defendants are not necessary parties. All the bondholders are represented by the trustee. (Jackson v. Tallmadge, 246 N. Y. 133; Vetterlein v. Barnes, 124 U. S. 169; Phœnix Nat. Bk. v. Cleveland Co., 11 N. Y. Supp. 873; Rogers v. Rogers, 3 Paige, 379.) The 31st clause of the complaint is authorized. (Real Prop. Law, § 501, added by Laws of 1920, chap. 930, as amd. by Laws of 1925, chap. 565.) If an adverse claim is set up, an application for a bill of particulars may be applied for. (Civ. Prac. Act, § 247.)
Motions denied, with ten dollars costs to'abide event.
So ordered.