Legal Opinion

Safety Car Heating & Lighting Co. v. United States Light & Heating Co.

District Court, W.D. New York

Decided August 21, 1924PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHazel, District Judge

(after stating the facts as above). The paramount contention of the new corporation, and emphasized by the other respondents, was that its obligation was contractual to pay a contingent claim without any right of equitable lien, and, further, that plaintiff erroneously joins an action to establish express liability, a remedy at law, with a pending action for infringement of patent.

It is unnecessary to recite the details of the scheme or plan of reorganizing the insolvent old company involving the issuance and sale of preferred and common stock and the existing indebtedness, or the issuance…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Northern Pacific Railway Co. v. BoydSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
  2. Hollins v. Brierfield Coal & Iron Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1893
  3. Scott v. NeelySupreme Court of the United States · 1891
  4. Simmons Creek Coal Co. v. DoranSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
  5. Root v. WoolworthSupreme Court of the United States · 1893

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Cobb v. Interstate Mortgage CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1927
  2. Overman Cushion Tire Co. v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1930

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

Powered by the Exa API