Poppleton v. Wallace

201 U.S. 245, 26 S. Ct. 498, 50 L. Ed. 743, 1906 U.S. LEXIS 1511
Supreme Court of the United States·Decided April 2, 1906·No. 194·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Mr. Justice Brewer:

This case is also an appeal by a stockholder from the same decree, and presents only-this difference: This stockholder voted against the, resolutions passed by the stockholders looking to a volunta^ liquidation. There is, therefore, nothing of a personal estoppel to be adjudged against him, but we do not think that that-is material. The requisite amount of stock was voted in favor of what was done ’ in the way of voluntary liquidation, and he as a stockholder is bound by that, although personally he dissented from the action. The same decree of affirmance will be entered in this case.

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

Poppleton v. Wallace, 201 U.S. 245, 26 S. Ct. 498, 50 L. Ed. 743, 1906 U.S. LEXIS 1511 (1906).

201 U.S. 245 (Poppleton v. Wallace) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Taylor v. American Nat. Bank
2 F.2d 479 (N.D. Texas, 1924)
Hightower v. American National Bank of MacOn
263 U.S. 351 (Supreme Court, 1923)
United States Fidelity Co. v. First State Bank
76 So. 747 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1917)
Byron v. First Nat. Bank
146 P. 516 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1915)