Seymour v. National Biscuit Co.

I am moved to dissent. The question raised by the appeal is a narrow one, perhaps not free from doubt. It is not, I think, precisely stated by my learned brethren. The confusion arises from, a failure to recognize the incidence of the breach. Thus, if Haskell had sold the stock, reinvested the proceeds in unimpeachable securities and held these for the remainder-men, let us say at substantially increased values, the majority would have held, nevertheless, that the remaindermen could insist that National Biscuit Company had committed a breach and must transfer the stock to them. It is not…