Knickerbocker Trust Co. v. Davis
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of New Jersey
On Rule to Show Cause Why a New Trial Should Not be Granted. On January 6, 1903, a written agreement was entered into by the Consolidated Industries Company, designated in the agreement as “syndicate managers,” and the several Individuals signing the agreement, designated as “underwriters.”
Read the full summary
On Rule to Show Cause Why a New Trial Should Not be Granted. On January 6, 1903, a written agreement was entered into by the Consolidated Industries Company, designated in the agreement as “syndicate managers,” and the several Individuals signing the agreement, designated as “underwriters.” The agreement, in its preamble, contained a number of recitals setting forth that the Consolidated Gas & Electric Company would rebuild its gas and electric plant, extend its mains for gas and electric supply, and erect coke ovens, by the purchase of real estate and the making of other improvements…
1Opinion of the CourtLanning, District Judge
(after stating the facts). The question presented in this case calls for a construction of the syndicate agreement set forth in the preceding statement. The defendant insists that no subscriber for bonds could become liable under the agreement, or upon any of the underwriting certificates, unless and until *590200 of the bonds should be subscribed for. The plaintiff, on the other hand, insists that each of the subscribers for the 63 bonds who did not at maturity pay the underwriting certificates signed by him became liable thereupon in an action at law. No other question is presented.
It will…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Bray v. . FarwellNew York Court of Appeals · 1880
- Knickerbocker Trust Co. v. CoyleU.S. Circuit Court for the District of New Jersey · 1905