Bank of California v. Collins
New York Supreme Court
Appeal from an order reviving and severing this action as to the executor of G. G. Oollins, deceased. This action would not survive at common law. It is for a penalty. (Dabney v. Stevens, 10 Abb. [N. S.], 69 ; Squires v. Brown, 22 How. Pr., 35; Vineent v. Sands, 33 Supr. Ct., 516; Merchants' Banh v. Bliss, 35 N. Y., 416; 13 Abb., 238 ; Deming v. Puleston, 33 Supr.
Read the full summary
Appeal from an order reviving and severing this action as to the executor of G. G. Oollins, deceased. This action would not survive at common law. It is for a penalty. (Dabney v. Stevens, 10 Abb. [N. S.], 69 ; Squires v. Brown, 22 How. Pr., 35; Vineent v. Sands, 33 Supr. Ct., 516; Merchants' Banh v. Bliss, 35 N. Y., 416; 13 Abb., 238 ; Deming v. Puleston, 33 Supr. Ct., 238 ; Bough-ton v. Otis, 29 Barb., 197; 21 N. Y., 464; Andrews v. Mivrray, 33 Barb., 356; Bird v. Hayden, 1 Robt., 386; McHarg v. Eastman, 7 id., 137.) At common law the test as to whether an action abated by the death of the…
1Opinion of the Court
Beady, J.:
This action was commenced by a creditor of the La Abra Silver Mining Company, a corporation created under the laws of this .State, against trustees who failed to publish an annual report as required by law. During. its pendency one of - the defendants, George C. Collins, died, and on motion for that purpose an order was made at Special Term reviving the action and severing it so that it might proceed against his executor. The executor appeals. The action is for a penalty. The provisions of the statute by which it is authorized appear to be severely punitive, imposed on grounds of…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Merchants' Bank of New Haven v. BlissNew York Court of Appeals · 1866
- Haight v. . HaytNew York Court of Appeals · 1859
- Andrews v. MurrayNew York Supreme Court · 1861
- Briggs v. EasterlyNew York Supreme Court · 1872
- Squires v. BrownThe Superior Court of New York City · 1861
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.