Skinner v. Home Bank of Brooklyn
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Reargument of an appeal by the defendants, Home Bank of Brooklyn and another, from a judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the plaintiff, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Kings on the 20th day of November, 1918, upon a decision of the court after a trial at Special Term. This is an action to enforce alleged statutory liability of the defendants as stockholders in the Union Bank of Brooklyn, pursuant to the Banking Law (Consol.
Read the full summary
Reargument of an appeal by the defendants, Home Bank of Brooklyn and another, from a judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the plaintiff, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Kings on the 20th day of November, 1918, upon a decision of the court after a trial at Special Term. This is an action to enforce alleged statutory liability of the defendants as stockholders in the Union Bank of Brooklyn, pursuant to the Banking Law (Consol. Laws, chap. 2 [Laws of 1909, chap. 10], § 71). The action was commenced on April 4, 1912, by the plaintiff Superintendent of Banks of the State…
1Dissent
Putnam, J. (dissenting):
On January 30, 1908, the Mechanics and Traders’ Bank closed, and went into the hands of a receiver. The circular of June 16, 1908, to stockholders, declared that as a condition of reopening, the Superintendent of Banks required that the stock be put in a voting trust, so that for five years “ the affairs of the Bank may be managed by voting trustees, whose *201appointment is subject to the approval of the Banking Department.” It announced the preparation of an agreement for this purpose, which had been signed by some of the stockholders. The old stock was to be…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- U.S. Radiator Co. v. . State of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1913
- Burr v. . WilcoxNew York Court of Appeals · 1860
- United States Radiator Corp. v. StateAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1912