Legal Opinion

Bell, Secy. of Banking v. Cabalik

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 3, 1942No. Appeal, 156PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,

This appeal is from a judgment entered for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in an action of assumpsit brought by the Secretary of Banking, as receiver of Pittsburgh-American Bank and Trust Company, to recover from a stockholder a stock assessment equal to the par value of her shares.

The questions raised by the appeal are the following: (1) Is the provision for shareholders’ individual liability contained in section 5 of the Act of 1876, P. L. 161, violative of Article III, section 3, of the Constitution of Pennsylvania? (2) As applied to banks of deposit organized under…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Kirschler v. WainwrightSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1917
  2. Gordon v. WinnebergerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
  3. Harr, SEC. of Bkg. v. BoucherSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
  4. Bell v. AbrahamSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1941

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Bell, Secy. of Banking v. BradySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1943
  2. Freeman, Etc. v. HiznaySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1944
  3. Freeman, Etc. v. RogalSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1944
  4. Freeman v. HudockSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1945
  5. Freeman, Etc. v. RogalSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1944

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

Powered by the Exa API