Legal Opinion

Read v. Tidewater Coal Exchange, Inc.

Court of Chancery of Delaware

Decided July 21, 1922PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The Chancellor.

It is urged in opposition to the petition of the receivers that to allow settlements of debits and credits to be made in the manner proposed by the receivers would permit one class of creditors to be preferred over other classes.

It is an ancient maxim that equality is equity. If the proposed method of settling the coal debits and credits will result in inequality among those whose rights stand on an equality, then, of course, this court ought to refuse the receivers the authority prayed for. In ascertaining what are the rights of interested parties, the nature and character of…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Read v. Tidewater Coal Exchange, Inc.Court of Chancery of Delaware · 1922
  2. Coyle v. Archibald McNeil & Sons Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1922
  3. Coyle v. Morrisdale Coal Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1922
  4. New River Collieries Co. v. SniderDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1922

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Tidewater Coal Exchange, Inc. v. New Amsterdam Casualty Co.District Court, D. Delaware · 1927
  2. Tidewater Coal Exchange, Inc. v. American Surety Co.Superior Court of Delaware · 1928
  3. NAMA Holdings, LLC v. Related WMC LLCCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 2014
  4. Tidewater Coal Exchange, Inc. v. New Amsterdam Casualty Co.District Court, D. Delaware · 1929

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

Powered by the Exa API