Union Water Co. v. Kean
New Jersey Court of Chancery
On final hearing on pleadings and proofs. The bill is filed by an incorporated company against certain individuals who claim to act as its board of directors, and the prayer is that the defendants may be enjoined from receiving any subscription for any share or shares of the capital stock'of the complainant; from issuing any receipt or certificate for any such share of stock; from calling in or receiving any moneys or installment on account of any share of such stock; from…
Read the full summary
On final hearing on pleadings and proofs. The bill is filed by an incorporated company against certain individuals who claim to act as its board of directors, and the prayer is that the defendants may be enjoined from receiving any subscription for any share or shares of the capital stock'of the complainant; from issuing any receipt or certificate for any such share of stock; from calling in or receiving any moneys or installment on account of any share of such stock; from erecting or constructing any building or work, and from laying any water-main for the supply of water authorized under…
1Opinion of the Court
Pitney, V. C.
I. The first question is whether, admitting the facts set out in-the bill to be true, and that the complainant has corporate existence under the proceedings of 1870, and is subject to the control of the Bigelow party, who instructed the filing of the bill, a-proper case is presented for the interposition of this court.
The defendants say there is not; that it is a proper case for - the use of an information in the nature of a writ of quo warranto to inquire into and determine whether or not the defendants were properly elected officers of the complainant, that such, remedy is…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Holmes, Booth & Haydens v. Holmes, Booth & Atwood Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1870
- Dutchess Cotton Manufactory v. DavisNew York Supreme Court · 1817
- President of the Goshen & Minisink Turnpike Road v. HurtinNew York Supreme Court · 1812
- Crocker v. CraneNew York Supreme Court · 1839
- Philips v. WickhamNew York Court of Chancery · 1829
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Wood v. . StatonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1917
- Middlesex Pipe Line Co. v. Libbrun Holding Co.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1940