Legal Opinion
Brown-Wales Co. v. Barber
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Decided April 7, 1936PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtWoodbury, J.
The court’s findings in relation to the treasury ■account item are not sufficient to support the verdict. From these findings it appears that there was no such item when the statement was made out, all of the newly authorized capital stock having then been issued, but it does not appear that there was no such item on January 1, 1931, the date as of which the statement spoke. In fact, on the undisputed evidence, it definitely appears that on that date there was actually in the treasury 45 shares of the old stock having a par value of eleven hundred and twenty-five dollars and that the new…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Reno v. . BullNew York Court of Appeals · 1919
- Hotaling v. A. B. Leach & Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1928
- Tedder v. RigginSupreme Court of Florida · 1913
- Fottler v. MoseleyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1904
3Cited by5 opinions
- Northern Laminate Sales, Inc. v. DavisCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2005
- Crowley v. Global Realty, Inc.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1984
- Hunt v. Goodimate Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1947
- Greenfield v. Fritz Companies, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2000
- Byron v. MeloonDistrict Court, D. New Hampshire · 1968