Hanson v. Donkersley
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Marquette. Assumpsit. The Morgan Iron Company owed Hanson for labor and he consented to extend the time of payment and accepted their note. He afterwards recovered judgment on the note, but as the execution was returned unsatisfied he sued Donkersley as a stockholder under Comp.
Read the full summary
Error to Marquette. Assumpsit. The Morgan Iron Company owed Hanson for labor and he consented to extend the time of payment and accepted their note. He afterwards recovered judgment on the note, but as the execution was returned unsatisfied he sued Donkersley as a stockholder under Comp. L., § 2852, which imposes upon stockholders an individual liability for labor done for the corporation, and allows it to be enforced at any time after the return of an execution unsatisfied, or after the corporation has been declared bankrupt. The court below instructed the jury that in suing the company upon…
1DissentMarston, J.
This was an action brought under section 2852 of the Compiled Laws, against the defendant as a stockholder of the Morgan Iron Company, to charge him for an alleged debt due from the company to the plaintiff for labor.
Previous to April 24th 1874 the plaintiff had performed labor for the Morgan Iron Company, a corporation formed under Chapter 95 of the Compiled Laws, and the company was at that date owing him a balance of $229.21 therefor.
This balance the company was then unable to pay, and wanted the time of payment extended four months. The plaintiff consented and accepted the note of tire…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Miller v. . WhiteNew York Court of Appeals · 1872
- Harger v. McCulloughNew York Supreme Court · 1846
- Young v. RosenbaumCalifornia Supreme Court · 1870
- Mokelumne Hill Canal & Mining Co. v. WoodburyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1859
- Bohn v. BrownMichigan Supreme Court · 1876
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.