Howarth v. Ellwanger
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern New York
At Law. Tried by the court. These actions are brought against the defendants who were stockholders of the' Traders’ Bank of Tacoma, Wash., to enforce a liability created by the law of that state making them individually responsible equally and ratably to the extent of their stock for all debts of the bank while they remained stockholders. The plaintiff is a citizen of Washington residing at Tacoma. The defendants are citizens of New York residing at Rochester.
Read the full summary
At Law. Tried by the court. These actions are brought against the defendants who were stockholders of the' Traders’ Bank of Tacoma, Wash., to enforce a liability created by the law of that state making them individually responsible equally and ratably to the extent of their stock for all debts of the bank while they remained stockholders. The plaintiff is a citizen of Washington residing at Tacoma. The defendants are citizens of New York residing at Rochester. On the 19th day of May, 1891, the plaintiff was appointed receiver of the Traders’ Bank by an order of the superior court of…
1Opinion of the Court
COXE, District Judge.
It is not disputed that the defendants were stockholders of the Traders’ Bank, that the bank became insolvent, that the plaintiff was appointed receiver, that a large deficiency was ascertained, that an assessment was levied by the receiver upon *55the defendants and that all this was done under and pursuant to the constitution and laws of Washington and in conformity to the orders and decrees of the superior court of that state.
The first proposition argued by the defendants is that the plaintiff, as receiver, is not entitled to maintain the action. The constitution and…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Hawkins v. GlennSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Wilson v. BookWashington Supreme Court · 1896
- Watterson v. MastersonWashington Supreme Court · 1896
- Cole v. Satsop RailroadWashington Supreme Court · 1894
- Hardin v. SweeneyWashington Supreme Court · 1896
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Deweese v. SmithCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1901
- Straw & Ellsworth Manufacturing Co. v. L. D. Kilbourne Boot & Shoe Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1900
- Kirtley v. HolmesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1901
- Hale v. CoffinU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Maine · 1902
- Miller v. AmorettiWyoming Supreme Court · 1919
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.