Page images
PDF
EPUB

220 Moving Affidavit on Plaintiff's Application to.

Vacate Order of May 7, 1932
Exhibit A, Attached Thereto

SUPREME COURT,
DUTCHESS COUNTY.

ISOEEL S. CARTER,

Plaintiff,

Vs.

221

ELVIRA S. GRAHAM, JULIA S.

Bock, John K. SAGUE, HELEN
N. SAGUE,
SAGUE, MARY

LANDON
SAGUE, S. WHITNEY LANDON,
Jr., and E. STERLING CARTER,
as Administrators of the es-
tate of James E. Sague, de-
ceased,

Defendants.

Sir:

Please Take Notice that upon the complaint in this actior, a copy of which is annexed hereto, the defendants, Elvira S. Graham and Julia S. Bock will move this Court at a Special Term

thereof appointed to be held in and for the 222 County of Dutchess at the County Court House

in the City of Poughkeepsie, N. Y., on the 21st day of May, 1932, at the opening of Court on that day or as soon thereafter as counsel can be heard, for an order pursuant to Rule 90 of the Rules of Civil Practice, requiring the plaintiff to serve an amended complaint wherein she shall separately state and number the facts constituting each cause of action, namely:

(a) a statement of the facts which constitute 223

Moving Affidavit on Plaintiff's Application to

Vacate Order of May 7, 1932

Exhibit A.

224

her alleged cause of action against the defendants for the specific performance of the contract alleged to have been made between her natural parents and her foster parents, and

(b) a statement of the facts which constitute her alleged cause of action against said defendants for a declaratory judgment decreeing the validity and legality of certain so-called adoption proceedings had and taken on or about April 25th, 1899 before the County Judge of Schenectady County wherein James E. Sague and wife purported to adopt the plaintiff and under which alleged cause of action plaintiff asks that by reason of said adoption she be adjudged the sole heir-at-law of James E. Sague, and

(c) a statement of the fact which constitutes
her alleged cause of action against said defend-
ants for an injunction restraining and enjoining
them from proceeding further in the probate of
heirship proceeding now pending in the Surro-
gate's Court of Dutchess County.
and for such other and further relief as may be 225
just and proper together with the costs of this
motion.
Dated, May 9th, 1932.

Yours etc.,
JOHN E. MACK,
RAYMOND E. ALDRICH

and PAUL ROSEN,
Attorneys for Defts., Elvira S.

Graham and Julia S. Bock,
Office & P. O. Address,
c/o Raymond E. Aldrich,

19 Market Street,

Poughkeepsie, N. Y.
To:
William A. Mulvey, Esq.,

Attorney for Plaintiff.

[ocr errors]

226 Moving Affidavit on Plaintiff's Application to

Vacate Order of May 7, 1932
Exhibit B, Attached Thereto

SUPREME COURT,

DUTCHESS COUNTY.

ISOBEL S. CARTER,

Plaintiff,

VS.

227

ELVIRA S. GRAHAM, JULIA S.

BOCK, JOHN K. SAGUE, HELEN
N. SAGUE, MARY

LANDON
Sague, S. WHITNEY LANDON,
Jr., and E. STERLING CARTER,
as Administrators of the es-
tate of James E. Sague, de-
ceased,

Defendants.

Upon the annexed affidavit of Paul Rosen sworn to May 7th, 1932, and upon the summons and complaint herein from which it appears that the time for the defendants, Elvira S. Graham and Julia S. Bock, to answer the complaint will expire on May 15th, 1932, and it appearing that

said defendants are moving under Rule 90 of the 228 Rules of Civil Practice to compel the plaintiff to

separately state and number the causes of action contained in said complaint, it is

Ordered that the time of the defendants, Elvira
S. Graham and Julia S. Bock to answer or make
any motion with relation to the complaint herein
be extended until twenty days after the service of
a copy of the order entered upon the defend-
ants' motion under Rule 90 of the Rules of Civil
Practice with notice of entry thereof, upon the
attorney for said defendants.
Dated: May 7th, 1932.

Enter,
JOSEPH MORSCHAUSER,

Justice Supreme Court.

1

Moving Affidavit on Plaintiff's Application to 229

Vacate Order of May 7, 1932

[blocks in formation]

State of New York,
County of Dutchess, ss:

Paul Rosen being duly sworn says:

I am one of the attorneys for the defendants 231 Elvira S. Graham and Julia S. Bock. The said defendants have fully and fairly stated the facts of the case to me and after such statement to me made by said defendants I verily believe and have so advised them that they have a good and substantial defense upon the merits to the causes of action set forth in the complaint and the said defendants intend to defend this action in good faith.

232 Moving Affidavit on Plaintiff's Application to

Vacate Order of May 7, 1932

Exhibit C.

The action is brought by Isobel S. Carter against the sisters and brother of James E. Sague, deceased, and also against his administrators for the purpose of obtaining the specific performance of a contract alleged to have been made by the natural parents of the plaintiff with James E. Sague, deceased, under which agreement it is claimed that during the infancy

of the plaintiff her natural parents surrendered 233 to James E. Sague her custody and control and

all rights over her in consideration of a promise by James E. Sague, deceased, to educate and maintain her and upon his death to leave her the same share and interest in his estate as she would inherit if she were his natural child. That the plaintiff also asks for a declaratory judgment decreeing the validity and legality of certain so-called adoption proceedings had and taken in the year 1899 before the County Judge of Schenectady County under and by which the decedent James E. Sprague purported to adopt her. The plaintiff further demands judgment

that the defendants be enjoined and restrained 234

from taking any further steps in connection with a probate of heirship proceeding in the estate of James E. Sague now pending before the Surrogate of Dutchess County.

The summons and complaint herein were served upon said defendants on or about March 21st, 1932. The said defendants within twenty days thereafter and before their time to file an answer had expired, served upon the plaintiff on April 8th, 1932, a notice of motion for an order dismissing said complaint on the ground that

« PreviousContinue »