Shipley v. Mechanics' Bank
New York Supreme Court
A M0TI0N was made for a mandamus, to be directed to the president, directors and company of the Mechanics’ Bank, commanding them to permit Morris Shipley and others, assignees of Samuel Kip, to transfer eight shares of the capital stock of the bank standing on the books of the company.
Read the full summary
A M0TI0N was made for a mandamus, to be directed to the president, directors and company of the Mechanics’ Bank, commanding them to permit Morris Shipley and others, assignees of Samuel Kip, to transfer eight shares of the capital stock of the bank standing on the books of the company. It appeared, from the affidavits read, that Kip had been regusarly discharged under the insolvent act, and that Shipley and others had been duly appointed the assignees of ail his estate, real and personal, and that the shares m question were inserted ui the inventory of his estate exhibited by the insolvent.…
1Per curiam
The applicants have an adequate remedy, by a special action on the case, to recover the value of the stock, if the bank have unduly refused to transfer it. There is no need of the extraordinary remedy by mandamus, in so ordinary a case. It might as well be required in every case where trover would lie. It is nota matter of public concern, as in the case of public record* and documents; and there cannot be any necessity, or even a desire of possessing the identical shares in question. By recovering the market value of them, at the time of the demand, they can be replaced. This is not the case…
2Cited by23 opinions
- Kimball v. Union Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1872
- Murray v. StevensMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1872
- Durham v. Monumental Silver Mining Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1880
- People ex rel. Hackley v. Croton Aqueduct BoardNew York Supreme Court · 1867
- State ex rel. Lyons v. Bank of ConceptionMissouri Court of Appeals · 1913
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.