Legal Opinion

Sprogg v. Dichman

New York Supreme Court

Decided July 15, 1899Published

Action by a creditor to ¿et aside the transfer of a seat in the New York Stock Exchange, dg fraudulent.

1Opinion of the CourtRussell, J.

The impression that Van Doesbnrgh is a necessary party defendant, formed upon the trial and announced to counsel, has deepened upon a review of the case and all of the evidence. There is no doubt that a trustee of an express trust may sue without joining the beneficiary and be sued by those antagonizing the trust or seeking to enforce its provisions. Code Civ. Pro., § 449; Vetterlein v. Barnes, 124 U. S. 169; Phenix Nat. Bank v. Cleveland Co., 11 N. Y. Supp. 873.

But in the case at bar Richard Henry Savage was a mere agent to take the assignment of the seat in the Stock Exchange of the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Vetterlein v. BarnesSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
  2. Phenix National Bank v. A. B. Cleveland Co.New York Supreme Court · 1890

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

Powered by the Exa API