Rensselaer County Agricultural & Horticultural Society v. Weatherwax

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rensselaer County Agricultural & Horticultural Society v. Weatherwax

233 A.D. 885

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJune 15, 1931

StatusPublished

This text of 233 A.D. 885 (Rensselaer County Agricultural & Horticultural Society v. Weatherwax) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Rensselaer County Agricultural & Horticultural Society v. Weatherwax, 233 A.D. 885 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1931).

Pincite

Opinion

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. All concur, except Hinman, J., who dissents on the ground that the former ruling of the court, on the precise issue as to which proof is now [886]*886desired to be made, justified the neglect to present proof at that time that the plaintiff had issued capital stock entitling shareholders to payment of dividends; that the affidavits presented on this motion, uncontradicted, show facts which tend to estop the plaintiff to deny that its stock entitled the shareholders to dividends; and that in the interests of justice the application should have been granted.

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

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. All concur, except Hinman, J., who dissents on the ground that the former ruling of the court, on the precise issue as to which proof is now [886]*886desired to be made, justified the neglect to present proof at that time that the plaintiff had issued capital stock entitling shareholders to payment of dividends; that the affidavits presented on this motion, uncontradicted, show facts which tend to estop the plaintiff to deny that its stock entitled the shareholders to dividends; and that in the interests of justice the application should have been granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

233 A.D. 885, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rensselaer-county-agricultural-horticultural-society-v-weatherwax-nyappdiv-1931.