Train v. Marshall Paper Co.
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract on two promissory notes against a corporation, to enforce the liability of directors under Pub. Sts. c. 106, § 60. Writ dated December 6, 1898. In the Superior Court, the case was heard upon agreed facts by Braley, J. By the agreed facts, it appeared, that on July 11, 1900, the defendant obtained its discharge in bankruptcy in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, under proceedings instituted against it January 26, 1899, under the…
Read the full summary
Contract on two promissory notes against a corporation, to enforce the liability of directors under Pub. Sts. c. 106, § 60. Writ dated December 6, 1898. In the Superior Court, the case was heard upon agreed facts by Braley, J. By the agreed facts, it appeared, that on July 11, 1900, the defendant obtained its discharge in bankruptcy in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, under proceedings instituted against it January 26, 1899, under the provisions of the United States bankrupt act of 1898. The debt sued upon in this action was provable under that act against…
1Opinion of the CourtHolmes, C. J.
This is an action upon two promissory notes made by the defendant, a corporation organized under Pub. Sts. c. 106. At the date of the writ its debts exceeded its capital. The defendant has obtained a discharge in bankruptcy, and the only question before us is whether the Superior Court should have entered some form of judgment against it, notwithstanding the discharge, for the purpose of enforcing the liability of the directors under Pub. Sts. c. 106, § 60.
*515Notwithstanding Loring v. Eager, 3 Cush. 188, and the cases that followed it, we assume, for the purposes of decision, that there is…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Hill v. HardingSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Carpenter v. TurrellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868
- Scott v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1863
- Archambeau v. PlattMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1899
- Hayes v. NashMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1880
3Cited by7 opinions
- E. S. Parks Shellac Co. v. HarrisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1921
- Cosmopolitan Trust Co. v. Suffolk Knitting MillsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1924
- Way v. BarneySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1911
- Barry v. New York Holding & Construction Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1918
- Hood v. Dun & Bradstreet, Inc.District Court, N.D. Georgia · 1971
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.