Case Name: Judiah Ellsworth v. Lewis Curtis et al.
Court: New York Court of Chancery
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1843-01-23
Citations: 2 Sarat. Ch. Sent. 72
Docket Number: 
Parties: Judiah Ellsworth v. Lewis Curtis et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Saratoga Chancery Sentinel
Volume: 2
Pages: 72–73

Head Matter:
Judiah Ellsworth v. Lewis Curtis et al.
Ellsworth, complainant, pro se ;
O. L. Barbour and N. Hill, Jr., for defendants.

Opinion:
Motion by complainant to take defendants' answer and disclaimer off the files of the court. The chancellor decided that the answer and disclaimer, in this case, covered the whole bill.
No exceptions will lie to a simple disclaimer.
But accompanying answer may excepted to.
Answer from officers of corporations.
That exceptions cannot be filed to a simple disclaimer; the only remedy of the complainant who is entitled to an answer, in such a case, being to move to take the disclaimer off the file.
But that if the disclaimer is accompanied by an insufficient 1 ' answer, the proper course is to except to the answer for sufficiency; as the defendant cannot, by a disclaimer, deprive the complainant of the benefit of a full answer, unless it is evident that the defendant ought not, after such disclaimer, to be continued a party to the suit.
That after all the effects of a corporation have been as-1 e signed to a receiver, for the benefit of its creditors, so it has no interest in a controversy relating to such effects, and ought not to be made a party thereto, it seems that an officer of such corporation who has no personal interest in the controversy, and is not charged with any fraud or misconduct, cannot be compelled to answer in relation to matters as to which he is a mere witness.
Motion denied with $'8 costs; but with liberty to complainant to except, within the usual time.