Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

9 A.D. 311

Rose v. Chadwick

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · decided 1896-07-01

Appeal by the plaintiff, Simon E. Rose, from a judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the defendants, George W. Chadwick and George W. Lynn, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Oneida on the 8th day of April, 1896, upon the dismissal of the complaint directed by the court after a trial before the court without a jury at a Trial Term of the Supreme Court, held in and for the county of Oneida, and also from an order entered in said clerk’s office on the 7th…

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently June 1939

1 state decisions

Relies on 1 E.H. Smith 603 - National Bank v. . Dillingham · Miller v. . White

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1896-07-01

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Follett, J.:

¶1This action was brought by a creditor of the Chadwick Leather Company, a business corporation organized under the laws of this *312State, against the directors thereof to recover his debt of them on the ground that they had failed to file annual reports in January, 1894, and in January, 1895, as required by the. 30th section of" the Stock Corporation Law (Laws of 1892, chap. 688).

¶2Two of the defendants answered and admitted that the reports had not been filed, and alleged that the claim of the plaintiff had been fully paid.

¶3When the case was moved for trial the complaint was dismissed on the ground that it was not alleged therein that the plaintiff liad recovered a judgment for the debt against the corporation and that. an execution thereon had been returned "unsatisfied. This was error. The recovery of a judgment and the return of an execution are not conditions precedent to the right of a creditor to recover from the directors of the corporation for failing to file reports. (Miller v. White, 50 N. Y. 137-141; Rorke v. Thomas, 56 id. 559-565 ; Green v. Easton, 74 Hun, 329 ; State Bank of Rock Valley v. Andrews, 2 Misc. Rep. 394 ; Strauss v. Trotter, 6 id. 77.)

¶4The case of The National Bank of Auburn v. Dillingham (147 N. Y. 603) arose under the 24th section of the Stock Corporation Law imposing a liability upon directors for creating an indebtedness not secured by mortgage in excess of the amount of its paid-up capital stock, and is not in point.

¶5• The judgment should be reversed and a- new trial ordered, with costs to abide the event.

¶6All concurred.

¶7Judgment and order reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to abide the event.

/9/ad/311 · .json · Public domain