Pentz v. Hawley
New York Court of Chancery
This case came before the chancellor upon an order for the receiver of the property and effects of the Canajoharie and. Catslcill Rail-Road Company, to show cause why an injunction, or an order in the nature of an injunction, should not be granted; to restrain him from proceeding upon a decree in his favor, against the present complainant, for the payment of the balance due upon the shares held by the latter in the capital stock of the corporation at the time of the…
Read the full summary
This case came before the chancellor upon an order for the receiver of the property and effects of the Canajoharie and. Catslcill Rail-Road Company, to show cause why an injunction, or an order in the nature of an injunction, should not be granted; to restrain him from proceeding upon a decree in his favor, against the present complainant, for the payment of the balance due upon the shares held by the latter in the capital stock of the corporation at the time of the appointment of such receiver. The object of the present suit was to compel all the stockholders to contribute rateably towards…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
There is nothing in the complainant’s bill in this case entitling him to an injunction, or to an order to stay the" receiver from collecting the amount which the assistant vice chancellor has decreed to be paid. Upon this application the court must presume that the decree against the complainant was right, and that the receiver was entitled to recover against him the whole of the balance due upon his stock in the corporation. For if there was any good reason why the present complainant ought not, in equity, to be required to pay to the receiver the balance due upon his stock,…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Van Buren v. Chenango County Mutual InsuranceNew York Supreme Court · 1852