Legal Opinion

Yorks v. Altmiller

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided May 2, 1921No. Appeal, No. 422PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Appeal, No. 422, Jan. T., 1921, by plaintiffs, from decree of C. P. Columbia Co., May T., 1918, No. 1, dismissing bill in equity, in case of Milton K. Yorks and Elsie A. Yorks (now Elsie Yorks Jones), executors of Frederick G. Yorks, deceased, and Deborah T. Little v. Charles F. Altmiller, Receiver, John L. Richardson, Frederick J. Richard, Edmund M. Savidge, the Richard Manufacturing Co., and Richard Manufacturing Co. Bill in equity to set aside receivership proceedings and…

Read the full summary

Appeal, No. 422, Jan. T., 1921, by plaintiffs, from decree of C. P. Columbia Co., May T., 1918, No. 1, dismissing bill in equity, in case of Milton K. Yorks and Elsie A. Yorks (now Elsie Yorks Jones), executors of Frederick G. Yorks, deceased, and Deborah T. Little v. Charles F. Altmiller, Receiver, John L. Richardson, Frederick J. Richard, Edmund M. Savidge, the Richard Manufacturing Co., and Richard Manufacturing Co. Bill in equity to set aside receivership proceedings and for accounting. Before Harman, P. J. The opinion of the Supreme Court states the facts. The court dismissed the bill.…

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Schaffer,

The Richard Manufacturing Company was engaged in making iron and steel specialties; for a number of years prior to 1914, it had not been successful, and had paid no dividends. The plaintiffs and the individual defendants were stockholders, and, with the exception of Deborah T. Little, bondholders. All the individual defendants were creditors of the company, whose finances had reached such a state, early in 1914, that it was without ready cash; creditors were pressing, it could obtain no further accommodations in banks, even with the endorsements of its…

2Cited by1 opinion

  1. Basalyga v. CommonwealthCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1971

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

Powered by the Exa API