Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

88 A.D. 529

Miller v. Barlow

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · decided 1903-07-01

' Appeal by the defendant, Josiah Quincy, from an interlocutory judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the plaintiff, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of New York on the 19th day of J une,' 1903, upon the decision of the court, rendered after a trial at the New York Special Term, overruling the said defendant’s demurrer to the plaintiff’s amended complaint.

Relies on Boardman v. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co.

Decided 1903-07-01

Hatch, J. (dissenting):

¶1I concur fully in the views of Mr. Justice Patterson. While foreign corporations are not amenable to the visitatorial power of the courts of this State, yet those courts have not hesitated to compel directors of such corporations to perform -acts directly relating to the management of their corporate affairs, such as the declaration of dividends. (Boardman v. Lake Shore & Mich. Southern Ry. Co., 84 N. Y. 157.) It is obvious that in many cases, unless the courts of this State will interfere to prevent acts of waste and the fraudulent disposition of property of foreign corporations doing business within this State, stockholders and creditors of such corporations may be defrauded with impunity. It is well known that corporations organized under the laws of other States, notably of West Virginia and Hew Jersey, transact all their business in the city of Hew York, and never act within the territory of the States under the laws of which they are organized, unless it possibly may be to hold a merely formal annual meeting. Those corporations are essentially, with respect to everything except their formal creation, corporations of this State. Hnless wrongs threatened or per*538petrated by directors may be prevented or redressed in the courts of this State, stockholders and creditors are remediless, Sections 1781 and 1782 of the Code, so far as they may apply to foreign corporations under the provisions of sections 1809,. 1810,1811 and 1812 of the Code, furnish protection to creditors and stockholders'; and section 1782 provides for a qualified plaintiff to institute proper and timely proceedings to prevent or to redress acts of rapine and fraud by officers or directors. Stockholders and creditors may not receive information in time to act effectively, while a director, trustee, manager or other officer of a corporation may be able to act at once.

¶2I think this demurrer should be overruled. .

¶3Judgment reversed, with costs, and demurrer sustained, with costs, with leave to plaintiff to amend complaint upon payment of costs in this court and in the court below,

/88/ad/529 · .json · Public domain