Patterson v. Franklin
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 272, Jan. T., 1896, by plamtiff, from judgment of C. P. Lancaster Co., Sept. T., 1893, No. 19, ,on verdict for defendants. Assumpsit to recover money alleged to be due on stock subscription.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 272, Jan. T., 1896, by plamtiff, from judgment of C. P. Lancaster Co., Sept. T., 1893, No. 19, ,on verdict for defendants. Assumpsit to recover money alleged to be due on stock subscription. Before Livingston, P. J. At tbe trial, the charter and accompanying affidavit of the Keystone Standard Watch Company having been offered in evidence, whereby it appeared that it had been asserted by those signing the application that the sum of $50,000, being ten per cent of the authorized capital, had been paid in cash to the treasurer of said company, and George M. Franklin having stated…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Williams,
The defendants were the incorporators and holders of the stock of the Keystone Standard Watch Company. In their application for letters patent, they set forth among other things that the capital stock of the corporation was $500,000 divided into five thousand shares of the par value of $100 each; and “ that fifty thousand dollars being ten per cent of the capital stock has been paid in cash to the treasurer of said corporation whose name and residence are William Z. Sener, Lancaster, Pa.” The statement is the method prescribed by law for assuring the executive…
2Cited by12 opinions
- Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors v. R.F. Lafferty & Co., Inc. Cogen Sklar, L.L.PCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2001
- Schacht v. BrownCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1983
- Cotten v. Republic National Bank of DallasCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1965
- Schacht v. BrownCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1983
- Kelly v. Overseas Investors, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1966
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.