State Bank & Trust Co. v. Locust Hill Gardens Corp.

226 A.D. 326, 235 N.Y.S. 159, 1929 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8713
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 7, 1929·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Finch, J.

From an order denying a motion to vacate an order appointing a receiver without notice to the Attorney-General of the State, the defendant corporation appeals. The Attorney-General now comes forward and gives his consent nunc pro tunc as of the date of the making of the original order appointing the receiver. This is ineffectual as the order appointing the receiver is void. The Legislature has declared a policy and made void any order or judgment granted in a judicial proceeding for the dissolution of a corporation or a distribution of its assets unless protection is afforded by notice to the Attorney-General. (Gen. Corp. Law, §312;

Footnotes

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

State Bank & Trust Co. v. Locust Hill Gardens Corp., 226 A.D. 326, 235 N.Y.S. 159, 1929 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8713 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1929).

226 A.D. 326 (State Bank & Trust Co. v. Locust Hill Gardens Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In re Bittner
178 Misc. 100 (New York Supreme Court, 1942)