Richardson v. Brainard-Powers Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Richardson v. Brainard-Powers Corp.

254 A.D. 631

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

DecidedMarch 9, 1938

DocketAppeal No. 1

StatusPublished

This text of 254 A.D. 631 (Richardson v. Brainard-Powers Corp.) 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

Richardson v. Brainard-Powers Corp., 254 A.D. 631 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1938).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order of September 25, 1937, as modified by order of October 13, 1937, modified on the law and the facts as matter of discretion, and as modified affirmed, without costs of this appeal to any party. Memorandum: This receivership in the nature of a sequestration seems to be prohibited by sections 150 and 151 of the General Corporation Law. But further and aside from this, it does not appear with any degree of certainty that the transfer of the lease of the Powers Hotel to the corporation defendant was fraudulent. It may well be that the plaintiff trustee will be confined, even if successful, to setting aside the transfers of stock to the defendant Rosebud Brainard. It may eventuate that the corporation was created legally and without fraud. (See Jenkins v. Moyse, 254 N. Y. 319.) As a matter of discretion a temporary injunction should be ordered in place of a receivership which should sufficiently protect the bankrupt estate of Roy P. Brainard. All concur. (The first order appoints a receiver; the second order resettles the first order.) Present — Sears, P. J., Crosby, Cunningham, Taylor and Dowling, JJ.

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

—Order of September 25, 1937, as modified by order of October 13, 1937, modified on the law and the facts as matter of discretion, and as modified affirmed, without costs of this appeal to any party. Memorandum: This receivership in the nature of a sequestration seems to be prohibited by sections 150 and 151 of the General Corporation Law. But further and aside from this, it does not appear with any degree of certainty that the transfer of the lease of the Powers Hotel to the corporation defendant was fraudulent. It may well be that the plaintiff trustee will be confined, even if successful, to setting aside the transfers of stock to the defendant Rosebud Brainard. It may eventuate that the corporation was created legally and without fraud. (See Jenkins v. Moyse, 254 N. Y. 319.) As a matter of discretion a temporary injunction should be ordered in place of a receivership which should sufficiently protect the bankrupt estate of Roy P. Brainard. All concur. (The first order appoints a receiver; the second order resettles the first order.) Present — Sears, P. J., Crosby, Cunningham, Taylor and Dowling, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

254 A.D. 631, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/richardson-v-brainard-powers-corp-nyappdiv-1938.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack