Dozier v. Arkadelphia Cotton Mills
Supreme Court of Arkansas
■ Appeal from Clark Circuit Court in Chancery. McNutt, as assignee of the claims against the insolvent eoporation, had no vested right, to a preference. He had only the right which the original creditors had. Broom, Leg. Max. § 354; Sheld. Sub. § 87. No preference has been “obtained or sought to be obtained” by him, in the sense of that expression in see. 1427, Sand. & H. Dig.
Read the full summary
■ Appeal from Clark Circuit Court in Chancery. McNutt, as assignee of the claims against the insolvent eoporation, had no vested right, to a preference. He had only the right which the original creditors had. Broom, Leg. Max. § 354; Sheld. Sub. § 87. No preference has been “obtained or sought to be obtained” by him, in the sense of that expression in see. 1427, Sand. & H. Dig. The ninety-day limitation prescribed for contesting preferences did not begin to run in his favor until the filing of his answer, as that was his first assertion of his claim. Nor did he have any power to dispose of the…
1Opinion of the CourtBunn, C. J.
The Arkadelphia Cotton Mills, one of the appellees in this case, a corporation organized and doing business under the laws of this state at the city of Arkadelphia, having become financially unable to carry on its business further, at a meeting of its stockholders, on the 24th of November, 1892, adopted the following resolutions, to-wit:
“Resolved, by the board of stockholders of the Aihadelphia Cotton Mills, that the embarrassed condition of this company’s finances render it inexpedient to further prosecute the business for which it was formed. Therefore, be it resolved, that this corporation…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Nedry v. VaileSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1913
- Wesco Supply Co. v. El Dorado Light & Water Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1913
- Dozier v. Arkadelphia Cotton MillsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1903
- Morgan Co. v. ElmesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1916