Western National Bank v. Faber
New York Supreme Court
Action upon promissory notes.
1Opinion of the CourtLawrence, J.
The decision of the Appellate Division of this court in Manhattan Company v. Kaldenberg, 27 App. Div. 31, that the report of 1892 was not in compliance with the provisions of the Stock Corporation Law, because not verified by two officers *469of the company, either the president or vice-president, together with either the treasurer or secretary, is conclusive upon a justice of this department, sitting at Trial Term, and I must, therefore, hold that such report is invalid for that reason. I am of the opinion that the evidence for the defendant establishes that he resigned as secretary and…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Whitney Arms Co. v. . BarlowNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
- Wilson v. Metropolitan Elevated Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1890
- Hanover National Bank v. American Dock & Trust Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1896
- Cameron v. . SeamanNew York Court of Appeals · 1877
- Whitaker v. . MastertonNew York Court of Appeals · 1887
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Winthrop Press v. PerkinsNew York Supreme Court · 1905