Man v. Cheeseman

16 F. Cas. 568, 1874 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 234
CourtDistrict Court, S.D. New York
DecidedNovember 23, 1874
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 16 F. Cas. 568 (Man v. Cheeseman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Man v. Cheeseman, 16 F. Cas. 568, 1874 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 234 (S.D.N.Y. 1874).

Opinion

BLATCHFORD, District Judge,

held, that Dr. Cheeseman was liable for the assessment of 54 per cent, ordered by the comptroller, although he had parted with the shares four years before, on the ground that in order to escape liability a shareholder must see that his stock is transferred upon the books of the bank to some person capable of succeeding to his obligations, and that the bank was not such a person, being prohibited by law from purchasing its own stock. It follows from this that the ordinary method of transfer by signing the blank power of attorney will not protect the shareholder, and that in all cases of sales of such bank stock he remains liable until the transfer is made on the bank’s books to his successor.

[569]*569The measure o£ liability is also very severe. Two points were made by Dr. Cheese-man’s counsel, as follows: First, that the liability was only for the deficiency, and could not be enforced until all the assets of the bank had been converted and applied by the receiver to the payment of the debts; and, second, that the shareholders liable for the deficiency are entitled to notice, and to some opportunity of ascertaining what the deficiency may be which they are called upon to make up. Both these points were overruled, the court holding that the shareholder was absolutely bound by the action of the comptroller in making the assessment, and that when such assessment had once been made the shareholder could interpose no defense against it. Thus shareholders are cut off from any examination of the accounts of the receiver or of the. debts allowed against the bank.

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

Related

Crawford v. Gamble
57 F.2d 15 (Sixth Circuit, 1932)
Bennett v. Wheatley
154 Ga. 591 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1922)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
16 F. Cas. 568, 1874 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 234, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/man-v-cheeseman-nysd-1874.