¶1I concur. The action not being for an accounting and the recovery of a balance upon facts to be ascertained, but for the recovery of a definite and specific share, the facts upon which the-plaintiff is entitled to such share should have been set forth. The-complaint fails to allege sufficient facts for that purpose.
21 N.Y.S. 619
Lacy v. Walcott
The Superior Court of the City of New York and Buffalo
Decided January 3, 1893
The Superior Court of the City of New York and Buffalo · decided 1893-01-03
Action by Peter De Lacy against Alfred F. Walcott, the Rapid Transit & Bridge Construction Company, and others, to compel the delivery to plaintiff of $100,000 of the capital stock of said company, and the repayment of $9,500. A demurrer to the complaint, as not stating facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, was overruled, and the defendants appeal. Reversed. For former report, see 13 N. Y. Supp. 800.
Decided 1893-01-03