Knickerbocker Trust Co. v. . Iselin
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered December 23, 1905, which affirmed an interlocutory judgment of Special Term overruling a demurrer to the- complaint. The following question was certified : “ Does the complaint state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action ? ” The ' nature of the action and the facts, so far as material, are stated in the opinion.
Read the full summary
Appeal, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered December 23, 1905, which affirmed an interlocutory judgment of Special Term overruling a demurrer to the- complaint. The following question was certified : “ Does the complaint state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action ? ” The ' nature of the action and the facts, so far as material, are stated in the opinion. The demurrer should have been sustained. (Marshall v. Sherman, 148 N. Y. 9 ; Stoddard v. Lum, 159 N. Y. 265 ; Howarth v. Angle, 162 N. Y. 179.) As a…
1Opinion of the CourtO’Brien, J.
The questions in this case arise upon a demurrer to the complaint on the ground that it does not state a cause of action. The purpose of the action was to enforce tiie statutory liability of the defendant as a stockholder in a Maryland corporation for a debt due to the plaintiff.
The action was commenced on the 19th of JSTovember, 1904, and the complaint alleges in substance the’following facts: That the plaintiff is a domestic corporation; that the City Trust and Banking Company was a Maryland corporation; that each stockholder therein is liable under the laws of that state to creditors of…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- McClaine v. RankinSupreme Court of the United States · 1905
- Marshall v. . ShermanNew York Court of Appeals · 1895
- Howarth v. . AngleNew York Court of Appeals · 1900
- Laing v. RigneySupreme Court of the United States · 1896
- Finney v. GuySupreme Court of the United States · 1903
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Groome v. Freyn Engineering Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1940
- Guffanti v. . National Surety Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1909
- Hanna v. . LichtenheinNew York Court of Appeals · 1919
- In re the Judicial Settlement of the Account of TallmadgeNew York Surrogate's Court · 1919
- State of Maryland v. TurnerNew York Supreme Court · 1911
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.