Barclay v. Talman
New York Court of Chancery
This case came before the court on an order to show cause why an injunction should not issue and a receiver be appointed.
Read the full summary
This case came before the court on an order to show cause why an injunction should not issue and a receiver be appointed. Besides the circumstances detailed in the bill, there were a few additional facts presented by the affidavits of the defendants. , The complainants were a portion of the stockholders of the American Life Insurance and Trust Company; and they exhibited their bill on behalf of themselves and of all the other stockholders—and it was expressed to be “ also on behalf of all those who were creditors of the company,” a corporation created by an act of the legislature of the state…
1Opinion of the Court
The Vice-Chancellor :
It is to be observed that the bill nowhere asks to have the assignment set aside, and the counsel for the complainant, on the argument, disclaimed all intention of impeaching its validity or of disturbing the trusts therein declared—on the contrary, they profess a willingness to have those trusts executed, with such modifications as a court of equity would naturally adopt in order to carry out the intendments of law and do complete justice to all parties—stockholders, as well as creditors.
There can be no doubt of the power of a court of chancery here or elsewhere to…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Hawkins v. GlennSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Glenn v. LiggettSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Parker v. Bethel Hotel Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1896
- Patterson v. LyndeIllinois Supreme Court · 1884
- State ex rel. Attorney-General v. Société Républicaine de Secours aux Emigrés Francais Victimes de la GuerreMissouri Court of Appeals · 1880
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.