Bangor Bridge Co. v. McMahon
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
This was assumpsit, brought to recover the amount of an assessment on a share in the Bangor Bridge Company, alleged to belong to the defendant. It appeared that the company had been duly organized, and that at a regular meeting, held in Bee. 1831, it was voted, “ that the stock be divided into 300 shares, “ and that a committee be appointed to solicit subscribers.” The committee appointed under this vote, prepared a subscription paper in the following terms.
Read the full summary
This was assumpsit, brought to recover the amount of an assessment on a share in the Bangor Bridge Company, alleged to belong to the defendant. It appeared that the company had been duly organized, and that at a regular meeting, held in Bee. 1831, it was voted, “ that the stock be divided into 300 shares, “ and that a committee be appointed to solicit subscribers.” The committee appointed under this vote, prepared a subscription paper in the following terms. “ Three hundred shares “ Bangor Bridge Corporation. — The subscribers agree to take “ and fill the number of shares in the Bangor Bridge…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Weston J.
The general remedy for the non-payment of assessments, in corporations of this character, is by the sale of the share of the delinquent proprietor. No other remedy exists, where the agreement is to take a certain number of shares. And in the case of the Andover and Medford Turnpike v. Gould, 6 Mass. 40, it was adjudged that no greater liability attached, where the agreement was to take a certain number of shares in that corporation, and to be a proprietor therein. Unless there is some further agreement or stipulation, as has been repeatedly…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Andover & Medford Turnpike Corp. v. GouldMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1809
- Inhabitants of Quincy v. Inhabitants of BraintreeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1809