Mead v. New York, Housatonic & Northern Railroad
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Bill for a foreclosure of a mortgage executed by the respondent railroad corporation to the petitioners as trustees for the holders of its bonds; brought to the Superior Court in Fairfield- County. - The New York, Housatonio & Northern Railroad Company, the respondent corporation, was a new corporation constituted by the consolidation of two previously existing railroad corporations, one of which bore the same name, and was located in part in this state and in part in the…
Read the full summary
Bill for a foreclosure of a mortgage executed by the respondent railroad corporation to the petitioners as trustees for the holders of its bonds; brought to the Superior Court in Fairfield- County. - The New York, Housatonio & Northern Railroad Company, the respondent corporation, was a new corporation constituted by the consolidation of two previously existing railroad corporations, one of which bore the same name, and was located in part in this state and in part in the state of New York, and the other was the Southern Westchester Railroad Company, located wholly within the state of New…
1Opinion of the CourtHovey, J.
The motion in error upon which the record in this cause is brought before us for revision, was filed by the respondent King as a stockholder and an attaching and execution creditor of the other respondent, the New York, Housatonic and Northern Railroad Company; and he is the only party who actually appears here as plaintiff in error and claims to be aggrieved by the decree of the Superior Court, though the respondent company is nominally a party.
Several questions are raised by the assignment of errors, some of which, owing to their importance, deserve careful consideration.
The first question…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Tevis v. YoungCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1858
- Daniel v. SorrellsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1846
- Prescott v. HeardMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1813
- Margoley v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1861
- Carter v. ChampionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1831
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- All Brand Importers, Inc. v. Department of Liquor ControlSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1989
- Georgia Southern & Florida Railroad v. Mercantile Trust & Deposit Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1894
- Louisville Trust Co. v. Louisville, N. A. & C. R. Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1896
- State ex informatione Crow v. Lincoln Trust Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1898
- Andretta v. Fox New England Theatres, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1931
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.