Allen v. Arnold

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

Allen v. Arnold

31 A. 268, 18 R.I. 809, 1895 R.I. LEXIS 18

DecidedFebruary 23, 1895

StatusPublished

This text of 31 A. 268 (Allen v. Arnold) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Rhode Island primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Allen v. Arnold, 31 A. 268, 18 R.I. 809, 1895 R.I. LEXIS 18 (R.I. 1895).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Assuming that the provisions of Pub. Stat. R. I. cap. 155, “Of Manufacturing Corporations,” to which, by its charter, the Warwick and Coventry Water Company is made subject, are applicable to that company which has no manufactory established either within or without this State, we do not think that the complainant is entitled to maintain his bill against the stockholders of that company, either to enforce their statutory liability or for contribution on the ground that they have not paid in full their subscriptions to the capital stock, until he has first exhausted his remedy against the company by obtaining a judgment at law against it and having the execution on that judgment returned unsatisfied, the reason being that the primary liability is that of the corporation, that of the stockholders being merely secondary. 1 Cook on Stock and Stockholders and Corporation Law, 3d ed. §§ 199, 200, 219, and notes.

Demurrer sustained.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam.

Assuming that the provisions of Pub. Stat. R. I. cap. 155, “Of Manufacturing Corporations,” to which, by its charter, the Warwick and Coventry Water Company is made subject, are applicable to that company which has no manufactory established either within or without this State, we do not think that the complainant is entitled to maintain his bill against the stockholders of that company, either to enforce their statutory liability or for contribution on the ground that they have not paid in full their subscriptions to the capital stock, until he has first exhausted his remedy against the company by obtaining a judgment at law against it and having the execution on that judgment returned unsatisfied, the reason being that the primary liability is that of the corporation, that of the stockholders being merely secondary. 1 Cook on Stock and Stockholders and Corporation Law, 3d ed. §§ 199, 200, 219, and notes.

Demurrer sustained.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

31 A. 268, 18 R.I. 809, 1895 R.I. LEXIS 18, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/allen-v-arnold-ri-1895.