Legal Opinion

Curley v. Smith

New York Supreme Court

Decided April 28, 1938PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWasservogel, J.

The complaint herein sets forth three substantially similar causes of action against each one of four stockbrokers, the first being based on the provisions of section 15 of the Stock Corporation Law; the second on section 274 of the Debtor and Creditor Law, and the third on subdivision 5 of section 60 of the General Corporation Law.

Plaintiff claims that Born, the president of the corporation of which he is now receiver, caused corporate moneys to be transferred to defendants (between 1927 and 1929) in payment of personal debts of Born, at a time when the corporation was indebted to one…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. American Surety Co. v. ConnerNew York Court of Appeals · 1929
  2. Keys v. LeopoldNew York Court of Appeals · 1925
  3. Potter v. WalkerNew York Court of Appeals · 1937
  4. Mills v. . MillsNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
  5. Pitcher v. SuttonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1933

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Curley v. SmithAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1938
  2. Amalfitano v. RosenbergCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2008
  3. Amalfitano v. RosenbergCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2008

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API