Van Cott v. . Van Brunt
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court, in the second judicial department, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision on trial at Special Term. The nature of the action and the facts are set forth sufficiently in the opinion. A cause of action against a defendant on an implied contract to pay up the amount of stock held by him cannot be joined with a cause of action against him for damages for a violation of duty as director.
Read the full summary
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court, in the second judicial department, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision on trial at Special Term. The nature of the action and the facts are set forth sufficiently in the opinion. A cause of action against a defendant on an implied contract to pay up the amount of stock held by him cannot be joined with a cause of action against him for damages for a violation of duty as director. ( Wooden v. Waffle, 6 How. Pr. 145; Hunter v. Powell, 15 id. 221; Flynn v. Bailey, 50 Barb. 73.) If the contract is to…
1Opinion of the CourtMiller, J.
The plaintiff, as receiver of the Hudson Avenue Bailroad Company, in his complaint claims to recover of the defendant Van Brunt, and one Slaght, as stockholders of said company, on account of unpaid stock held by them respectively. It is alleged that the defendant Van Brunt was president, director and principal manager, and Slaght a director, of said company; that the management of the corporation from the commencement was fraudulent and illegal toward the corporation and its creditors, and an accounting is asked of the assets, debts and liabilities, and of the stock held by said defendants…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Upton v. TribilcockSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
- Boynton v. . HatchNew York Court of Appeals · 1872
- Hart v. LaumanNew York Supreme Court · 1859
- Tallmadge v. Fishkill Iron Co.New York Supreme Court · 1848
- Porter v. Buckfield Branch RailroadSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1851
3Cited by36 opinions
- Gamble v. Queens County Water Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1890
- Coit v. Gold Amalgamating Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Barr v. New York, Lake Erie & Western RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
- Van Cleve v. BerkeySupreme Court of Missouri · 1898
- Elyton Land Co. v. Birmingham Warehouse & Elevator Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1890
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.