Holton v. New Castle Ry. Co.

Citations

• 138 Pa. 111
• 20 A. 937
• 1890 Pa. LEXIS 1245

Syllabus

<p>1. A specification that “the court erred in overruling each and all plaintiffs’ exceptions to the master’s report,” will not he considered. Specifications that the court erred “ in sustaining the master’s findings,” or, “in confirming the master’s report,” are insufficient, unless clear error is pointed out.</p> <p>2. A bill filed to enforce the rights of a corporation must bo filed by and in the name of the corporation; if filed by a shareholder, it must contain an averment of a demand made upon the corporation to institute the suit, and of a refusal of the corporation so to do.</p> <p>3. In a creditor’s bill filed against a corporation, a mere reference to the plaintiff as a creditor, in the caption of the bill, is insufficient; there must be a specific averment, in the bill itself, of the facts showing the plaintiff’s interest in the subject-matter of the suit.</p>