People v. E. Remington & Sons
New York Supreme Court
Appeal from special term, Onondaga county. The defendant E. Remington & Sons was a manufacturing corporation, organized in 1861. On the 21st April, 1886, it was insolvent, and at that date, in an action brought for its dissolution, temporary receivers of its property and •effects were duly appointed, andón the 5th June, 1886, judgment was entered in the action, dissolving the corporation, and making the receivership permanent.
Read the full summary
Appeal from special term, Onondaga county. The defendant E. Remington & Sons was a manufacturing corporation, organized in 1861. On the 21st April, 1886, it was insolvent, and at that date, in an action brought for its dissolution, temporary receivers of its property and •effects were duly appointed, andón the 5th June, 1886, judgment was entered in the action, dissolving the corporation, and making the receivership permanent. On the 21st April, 1886, the Oneida National Bank held obligations against the corporation amounting, at their face, to $43,077.50 that represented actual debts. Of…
1Opinion of the CourtMerwin, J.
It will be observed that E. Remington & Sons are liable upon all the obligations representing the actual debts, making up the aggregate of $43,077.50, held by the bank, and proved without objection. Such liability, to the extent of $11,000, is as indorser, and on the balance as maker. The Remington Agricultural Company and P. Remington are neither of them liable on $5,600; they are liable one or the other on the balance. The referee held that the coupon notes of the corporation did not constitute a valid security for the payment of its own indebtedness, and applied this rule to the $5,600. He…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Third National Bank v. Eastern RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1877
3Cited by3 opinions
- Hitner v. Diamond State Steel Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Delaware · 1910
- International Trust Co. v. Union Cattle Co.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1892
- People v. E. Remington & SonsNew York Supreme Court · 1891