Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Taylor v. Philadelphia & Reading Railroad

United States Circuit Court

Decided April 21, 1881Published

This was a hearing upon two motions,—one for a preliminary injunction on a bill hied by stockholders of a railroad to restrain the company, which was then in the hands of receivers, from issuing certain “deferred bonds” and from executing a certain mortgage upon its road; and the other for the rescission of an order made in the suit in which the receivers had been appointed, and authorizing the issue of the said “deferred bonds.”

Read the full summary

This was a hearing upon two motions,—one for a preliminary injunction on a bill hied by stockholders of a railroad to restrain the company, which was then in the hands of receivers, from issuing certain “deferred bonds” and from executing a certain mortgage upon its road; and the other for the rescission of an order made in the suit in which the receivers had been appointed, and authorizing the issue of the said “deferred bonds.” The facts appearing by the bill, petition, and affidavits were as follows : The Philadelphia & Reading Railroad Company is a corporation chartered by the legislature…

1Concurrence

Butler, D. J.,

concurring. I propose to consider one only of the several aspects in which this case has been presented. Are the contemplated acts charged in the bill ultra vires— in other words, have the defendants lawful authority to do what is proposed by the “deferred-bond scheme?” As described in the president’s “plan for financial re-organization,” in the directors’ and receivers’ petition to the court, of November, 1880, and in the prospectus subsequently issued, and as illustrated by the sample before us of certificate or bond to be delivered to subscribers, it proposes an issue of…

2Cases cited34 opinions

  1. National Bank v. MatthewsSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
  2. Merchants' Bank v. State BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1871
  3. Thomas v. Railroad Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1880
  4. Gelpcke v. DubuqueSupreme Court of the United States · 1864
  5. Kent v. . Quicksilver Mining Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1879

29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API