Legal Opinion

Schneider v. Hamilton Trust Co. of Paterson

New Jersey Court of Chancery

Decided May 14, 1934PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

In the penultimate paragraph of an earlier opinion (105 N.J. Eq. 373), it was stated that $5,657.28 of the insolvent Savoy Silk Mills had been appropriated by the trust company to its own use, for which it must account. The trust company accounted by showing that it had paid the money to creditors of the insolvent company. Thereupon, the receiver amended his bill charging that the trust company, as agent of the insolvent company, paid the money after insolvency, in violation of the sixty-fourth section of the Corporation act, which forbids directors, officers or agents of insolvent…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Turp v. DickinsonNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1926
  2. Wilkinson v. BauerleSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1886
  3. Schneider v. the Hamilton Trust Co.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1929

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State, Dept. of Treasury v. Qwest Communications International, Inc.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2006
  2. Baliko v. SteckerNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1994
  3. Central-Penn, Bank v. N.J. FidelityNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1935

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

Powered by the Exa API