Mann v. Pentz
New York Court of Chancery
These suits were commenced by the receiver of The Cattskil] and Canajoharie Rail Road Company, against three of its stockholders, to compel them to pay up their shares in its capital stock. They were substantially alike in the pleadings and testimony, and were heard at the same time.
Read the full summary
These suits were commenced by the receiver of The Cattskil] and Canajoharie Rail Road Company, against three of its stockholders, to compel them to pay up their shares in its capital stock. They were substantially alike in the pleadings and testimony, and were heard at the same time. It appeared that the company in question was incorporated on the 19th of April, 1830, with a capital of $609,000, divided into shares of fifty dollars each; which the legislature in 1837, authorized to be increased to a million of dollars. The Messrs, Pentz were original subscribers for the capital stock, each…
1Opinion of the Court
The Assistant Vice-Chancellor.
The first and most important objection made to the complainant’s claim, is that he is a receiver merely as at common law, and that he has none of the powers conferred by the 42d section of the revised statutes rela*260live to procedings against corporations in equity. (2 R. S. 464, §42.)
There may still be a question whether the receiver under the 36th section of the same statute is not clothed with the power assumed by this bill, even if the 42d section is not applicable to such receiver.
1. As to the forcé of the 42d section. The 36th section of the statute, is…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Nathan v. WhitlockNew York Court of Chancery · 1841
- Morgan v. New-York & Albany Rail RoadNew York Court of Chancery · 1843
- In re the President, Directors & Co. of the Franklin BankNew York Court of Chancery · 1828
- Judson v. Rossie Galena Co.New York Court of Chancery · 1842
- Ryckman v. ParkinsNew York Court of Chancery · 1836
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Stoddard v. . LumNew York Court of Appeals · 1899
- Wilson v. AllenNew York Supreme Court · 1849
- Voorhees v. SeymourNew York Supreme Court · 1857
- District of Columbia v. Camden Iron WorksCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1899
- Adams v. HaskellCalifornia District Court · 1857