Herkimer County Bank v. Furman
New York Supreme Court
Appeal by the defendant from a decision made at a special term, overruling the demurrer to the complaint. The complaint alleged that the defendant, at the time of the dissolution of the Astorogan Company hereinafter mentioned, was one of the persons composing said Astorogan Company, and then owned four and one-fourth shares of the capital stock thereof, the shares representing each one hundred dollars ; that said .Astorogan Company was a manufacturing corporation, formed,…
Read the full summary
Appeal by the defendant from a decision made at a special term, overruling the demurrer to the complaint. The complaint alleged that the defendant, at the time of the dissolution of the Astorogan Company hereinafter mentioned, was one of the persons composing said Astorogan Company, and then owned four and one-fourth shares of the capital stock thereof, the shares representing each one hundred dollars ; that said .Astorogan Company was a manufacturing corporation, formed, and existing, and carrying on the business of manufacturing cotton goods, in the county of Herkimer, prior to and on the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Gridley, J.
This cause comes before us on an appeal by the defendant from the decision of a single judge. If it had appeared in the complaint that the dissolution of the Astoro*119gan Company took place under the act of 1852, that fact would have been fatal to the action, for the reasons stated in the opinion delivered this term in the case of Walker v. Crain, (a) to which we refer for the grounds of the judgment. But there is nothing to indicate that the proceeding was under the act of 1852 to be found in the complaint, except what is purely conjectural, and we cannot assume .it. If…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Persons v. GardnerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1899
- Hyatt v. McMahonNew York Supreme Court · 1857
- Cuykendall v. . CorningNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
- Burt v. PowisNew York Supreme Court · 1858
- Persons v. GardinerNew York Supreme Court · 1899