Herrman v. Maxwell
The Superior Court of New York City
By their complaint the plaintiffs alleged : That in December, 1877, they received from the firm of Netter & Co., bankers and brokers, a certificate representing two hundred shares of the capital stock of theU.
Read the full summary
By their complaint the plaintiffs alleged : That in December, 1877, they received from the firm of Netter & Co., bankers and brokers, a certificate representing two hundred shares of the capital stock of theU. S. Express Co., issued to A. C. Vogdes, with the usual blank power of attorney indorsed thereon, and that in good faith and without notice of any adverse claim thereto, they loaned to said Netter & Co. a sum exceeding the value of said stock, upon the credit thereof; that the loan became due shortly thereafter, but was not paid; that thereupon plain tiffs were about to sell or transfer…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.—Freedman, J.
The position of the defendants towards the plaintiffs, at the time of the collection by them of the dividends, was the same as if the stock of the defendants had been voluntarily pledged by them to the plaintiffs for the debt of Setter & Co. for a larger amount, and the precise question presented for determination therefore is, whether, as between pledgor .and pledgee, a pledge of stock per se includes a pledge of the dividends which may be declared during the life of the pledge. It has been settled, by repeated adjudications, that, as between the parties, the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- McNeil v. . the Tenth National BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
- Johnson v. . UnderhillNew York Court of Appeals · 1873
- Currie v. . WhiteNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
- Patrick v. . MetcalfNew York Court of Appeals · 1867
- Bradley v. RootNew York Court of Chancery · 1836
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Reed v. KellermanDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1941