Mintz v. Joseph Clavin & Co.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the CourtMcNally, J.
The plaintiffs-respondents, by their brief, concede the sole and determinative issue on this appeal to be whether they are bound by the composition agreement between the corporate defendant-appellant and its creditors; if not, then the judgment should be affirmed, otherwise it should be reversed, and the complaint dismissed.
On this record, we find that plaintiffs, through the plaintiff, Lee R. Mintz, a member of the committee of creditors of the corporate defendant, became parties to the composition agreement between said defendant and its creditors, thereby obligating plaintiffs to accept…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Bernardine v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1945
- Small v. . HousmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1913
- White v. . KuntzNew York Court of Appeals · 1887
- Hanover National Bank v. BlakeNew York Court of Appeals · 1894
3Cited by2 opinions
- Metro Burak, Inc. v. Rosenthal & Rosenthal, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1976
- Metro Burak, Inc. v. Rosenthal & Rosenthal, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1975