Van Hook v. Whitlock
New York Court of Chancery
Bill by creditors of the Commercial Insurance Company of New York against stockholders, for the purpose ofmak-ng tbem personally liable. A sweeping plea of the statute of limitations had, in the first instance, been interposed; and this was disallowed by his honor the Chancellor: see, 3. Paige’s C. R. 410. The cause now came'before the Vice-Chancellor of the first circuit upon bill, answers and'proofs.
Read the full summary
Bill by creditors of the Commercial Insurance Company of New York against stockholders, for the purpose ofmak-ng tbem personally liable. A sweeping plea of the statute of limitations had, in the first instance, been interposed; and this was disallowed by his honor the Chancellor: see, 3. Paige’s C. R. 410. The cause now came'before the Vice-Chancellor of the first circuit upon bill, answers and'proofs. The defendants severed in their pleading, but most of them still relied upon the statute of limitations, in, about, the following words: “And these defendants further answering severally each…
1Opinion of the Court
The Vice-Chancellor:
When this cause came before-the Chancellor upon the plea of the statute of limitations, which was interposed by some of the defendants (see, 3 Paige’s C. II. 409,) the form and substance of the plea were both considered ; and it was held to be defective and insufficient as a bar. His honor, at the same time, settled the construction of the statute as applicable to the complainants claims, as well as the nature of the defendants liability, in such a way as relieves me from the necessity of going into an examination of some of the grounds of defence taken by the answers and…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Gillespie v. WinbergNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1872