Case Name: TALLMADGE v. LOUNSBURY
Court: New York Superior Court
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1889-09
Citations: 23 Abb. N. Cas. 331
Docket Number: 
Parties: TALLMADGE v. LOUNSBURY.
Judges: 
Reporter: Abbott's New Cases
Volume: 23
Pages: 331–332

Head Matter:
TALLMADGE v. LOUNSBURY.
N. Y. Superior Court, Special Term;
September, 1889.
Verification by officer of-voluntary association.] An answer of a voluntary association, sued by its treasurer, must be verified by him ;. and if another officer of the association makes the verification, he-must do so as an agent or attorney.
Motion to compel the plaintiff to accept the defendant’s-answer.
Daniel W. Tallmadge and George G. Martin sued the Republican League of the United States for work, labor and services rendered and material furnished to the defendant, and named Phineas 0. Lounsbury as treasurer of the defendant as the party defendant.
The defendant interposed an answer to the complaint, and verified the same by its secretary as follows :
“ Andrew B. Humphrey, being duly sworn, says: * that lie is the secretary of the defendant herein ; that he has read the foregoing answer and knows the contents thereof; that the same is true to his own knowledge, except as to the-matters therein stated to be alleged upon information, and as to those matters he believes it to be true.’ ”
Thereupon the plaintiffs returned the answer as a nullity on the ground that a duly verified answer had not been interposed, the same not having been verified by the defendant’s treasurer nor his agent or attorney.
The defendant took an order to show cause why the plaintiffs should not be compelled to accept the answer as. interposed, with a stay of entry of judgment meanwhile.
Blanchard, Gay cfi Phelps, for the defendant and the motion.
Alex. S. Bacon (Nichols & Bacon, attorneys), for the plaintiff, opposed, contended as follows:
The verification is insufficient. A voluntary association sued by its treasurer •can only verify by the treasurer, and if its pleading is verified by another officer, it must be so done as agent or attorney. •Only domestic corporations can verify by any officer without ■stating reasons why the verification is so made (Code Civ. Pro. §§ 524-526). The statute is inapplicable to a voluntary association. The plaintiff rightly returned the answer as a nullity (Code Civ. Pro. § 528).
By parity of reasoning the same rule would apply to the verification! on behalf of an association plaintiff.

Opinion:
Dugro, J.
The cause shown by the plaintiff is sufficient; >the stay is vacated.