Hook v. Whitlock
New York Court of Chancery
The bill in this cause was filed on the 9th of January, 1830, by the complainants, in behalf of themselves and all the other creditors of The Commercial Insurance Company of New-York, against the defendants, as stockholders of that company at the time of its dissolution.
Read the full summary
The bill in this cause was filed on the 9th of January, 1830, by the complainants, in behalf of themselves and all the other creditors of The Commercial Insurance Company of New-York, against the defendants, as stockholders of that company at the time of its dissolution. The company was incorporated in April, 1805, to continue until the second Tuesday of January, 1820. By the twelfth section of the act of incorporation, (4 W. fy S. Laws of A/*. ¥. 147,) it was provided, that as to all debts contracted by the company before the second Tuesday of January, 1820, the persons, composing the…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
The second section of the act of April, 1814, (3 Laws of N. Y. 199, b.) makes the assignment, under the order of the proper officer, a full discharge, not only to the corporation but also to the president, directors and stockholders of the company, from all debts due at the time of the assignment. But as all the debts due to these complainants were contracted before the passing of that act, it was void as to those debts, as a law impairing the obligation of contracts. And according to the decision of the supreme court of the United States, in Sturges v. Crowningshield, (4…
2Cited by24 opinions
- Elwood v. DeifendorfNew York Supreme Court · 1848
- Eames v. DorisIllinois Supreme Court · 1882
- Wadsworth v. ThomasNew York Supreme Court · 1849
- The People v. . ClarkeNew York Court of Appeals · 1853
- Georgia Masonic Insurance v. DavisSupreme Court of Georgia · 1879
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.