Strebe v. Albert

New York Marine Court

Strebe v. Albert

2 N.Y. City Ct. Rep. 40

DecidedJuly 15, 1882

StatusPublished

This text of 2 N.Y. City Ct. Rep. 40 (Strebe v. Albert) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Marine Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Strebe v. Albert, 2 N.Y. City Ct. Rep. 40 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1882).

Pincite

Opinion

McAdam, J.

At the meeting of February 18, 1881, the society resolved that its officers be directed to with[41]*41draw its moneys from the "banks, and that the president he directed to distribute the same, and that the society be dissolved.' In order to carry this resolution into practical effect the president must distribute to the different members the moneys drawn from the bank under its authority. This the president cannot do until he first receives the money from the defendant who obtained it from the banks under this resolution. The joint ownership of the fund continues until division thereof is actually made by the president, so that prior thereto no individual member can be said to have a separate proprietary interest in or to •any specific part of it. The defendant’s excuse for not paying over the money,—i. e., that it was stolen from him, —having been held insufficient by the special finding of the jury, that the loss was the result of negligence, it follows that the plaintiff, as president of the society, is entitled to judgment for $484.12, the amount of the fund in dispute, to the end that when collected he may distribute "the same according to the resolution before referred to-"When this result is accomplished, and not till then, will the society be dissolved in the full sense in which that term is used in the resolution.

Judgment accordingly.

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

McAdam, J.

At the meeting of February 18, 1881, the society resolved that its officers be directed to with[41]*41draw its moneys from the "banks, and that the president he directed to distribute the same, and that the society be dissolved.' In order to carry this resolution into practical effect the president must distribute to the different members the moneys drawn from the bank under its authority. This the president cannot do until he first receives the money from the defendant who obtained it from the banks under this resolution. The joint ownership of the fund continues until division thereof is actually made by the president, so that prior thereto no individual member can be said to have a separate proprietary interest in or to •any specific part of it. The defendant’s excuse for not paying over the money,—i. e., that it was stolen from him, —having been held insufficient by the special finding of the jury, that the loss was the result of negligence, it follows that the plaintiff, as president of the society, is entitled to judgment for $484.12, the amount of the fund in dispute, to the end that when collected he may distribute "the same according to the resolution before referred to-"When this result is accomplished, and not till then, will the society be dissolved in the full sense in which that term is used in the resolution.

Judgment accordingly.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 N.Y. City Ct. Rep. 40, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/strebe-v-albert-nymarct-1882.