Bridgers v. First National Bank
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Appeal from Cooke, J., heard at chambers, in Nance County, 8 October, 1909, by consent, in an action arising in Edgecombe. This was a civil action instituted in the Superior Court of Edgecombe County, on motion to continue the restraining order issued. His Honor continued the restraining order and enjoined the defendants from putting the agreement hereinafter stated into effect, or taking any action thereunder.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Cooke, J., heard at chambers, in Nance County, 8 October, 1909, by consent, in an action arising in Edgecombe. This was a civil action instituted in the Superior Court of Edgecombe County, on motion to continue the restraining order issued. His Honor continued the restraining order and enjoined the defendants from putting the agreement hereinafter stated into effect, or taking any action thereunder. It was admitted that the First National Bank of Tarboro was duly organized under the National banking act, and was conducting a general banking business as authorized by law; that…
1Opinion of the CourtManning, J.
The defendants’ counsel frankly concede that-the judge below was correct in his ruling, unless we now modify the doctrine announced by this Court in Harvey v._Imp. Co., 118 N. C., 693; Bridgers v. Staton, 150 N. C., 216; Sheppard v. Power Co., 150 N. C., 776. We have, therefore, re-examined the question presented with great care, and have reached the conclusion that the principles .controlling the decision of those cases above cited are wise, salutary and make for the better management of corporate bodies.
The “voting-trust” agreement presented in the present case is in contravention of a wise…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Concord First National Bank v. HawkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1899
- Shepaug Voting Trust CasesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1890
- Truitt-Silvey Hat Co. v. Callaway & TruittSupreme Court of Georgia · 1908
- Morel v. HogeSupreme Court of Georgia · 1908
- Harvey v. Linville Improvement Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1896
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- People ex rel. Arkansas Valley Sugar Beet & Irrigated Land Co. v. BurkeSupreme Court of Colorado · 1923
- Bankers' Fire Marine Ins. Co. v. SlossSupreme Court of Alabama · 1934
- Robinson v. BenbowCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1924
- Luthy v. ReamAppellate Court of Illinois · 1914
- Medbery v. Newport Gas Light Co.Superior Court of Rhode Island · 1928
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.