Legal Opinion

Squire, Supt. v. Harris

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided May 31, 1939No. 27235PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtZimmerman, J.

This case presents a close question and must be decided largely upon an interpretation of Section 3, Article XIII of the Ohio Constitution, in the light of the facts:

That section, prior to its amendment effective July 1, 1937, recited in part:

‘Stockholders of corporations authorised to receive money on deposit shall be held individually responsible, equally and ratably, and not for one another, for all contracts, debts, and engagements of such corporations, to the extent of the amount of their stock therein, at the par value thereof, in addition to the amount invested in such shares.”…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Hospelhorn v. PoeCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1938
  2. Broderick v. Aaron (Kornberg)New York Court of Appeals · 1935
  3. Peterson v. StrayerNebraska Supreme Court · 1931

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Brown v. RosenbaumNew York Court of Appeals · 1942
  2. State of Ohio ex rel. Squire v. PorterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  3. State Ex Rel. Department of Financial Institutions v. HardyIndiana Supreme Court · 1941

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

Powered by the Exa API