Superintendent of Banks of New York v. Fenton

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Superintendent of Banks of New York v. Fenton

2 N.E.2d 557, 294 Mass. 524, 1936 Mass. LEXIS 1251

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedJune 1, 1936

StatusPublished

This text of 2 N.E.2d 557 (Superintendent of Banks of New York v. Fenton) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Superintendent of Banks of New York v. Fenton, 2 N.E.2d 557, 294 Mass. 524, 1936 Mass. LEXIS 1251 (Mass. 1936).

Pincite

Opinion

Lummus, J.

This case, like Superintendent of Banks of New York s. Moors, ante, 518, just decided, is an action to recover an assessment upon a stockholder in the Bank of United States. The declaration set out the facts and the [525]*525levy of an assessment as shown in the opinion in that case. The defendant demurred to the declaration, and also filed a “plea in abatement,” setting up (1) that the remedy should be in equity, (2) that the proceeding should have been brought in the Supreme Judicial Court instead of the Superior Court, and (3) that the liability can be enforced only by a receiver appointed in this Commonwealth. The demurrer and the “ plea” were sustained, and the case was reported.

The points that the remedy should be in equity, and that the liability can be enforced only by a receiver appointed in this Commonwealth, are disposed of by Superintendent of Banks of New York v. Moors, ante, 518. There is nothing in the point that the proceeding should have been brought in the Supreme Judicial Court under G. L. (Ter. Ed.) c. 167, § 24. That section relates to the liability of stockholders in domestic banks, not to contract obligations arising elsewhere. Cosmopolitan Trust Co. v. Cohen, 244 Mass. 128. The declaration set out a good cause of action. Superintendent of Banks of New York v. Moors, ante, 518.

Order sustaining demurrer and plea reversed.

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

Lummus, J.

This case, like Superintendent of Banks of New York s. Moors, ante, 518, just decided, is an action to recover an assessment upon a stockholder in the Bank of United States. The declaration set out the facts and the [525]*525levy of an assessment as shown in the opinion in that case. The defendant demurred to the declaration, and also filed a “plea in abatement,” setting up (1) that the remedy should be in equity, (2) that the proceeding should have been brought in the Supreme Judicial Court instead of the Superior Court, and (3) that the liability can be enforced only by a receiver appointed in this Commonwealth. The demurrer and the “ plea” were sustained, and the case was reported.

The points that the remedy should be in equity, and that the liability can be enforced only by a receiver appointed in this Commonwealth, are disposed of by Superintendent of Banks of New York v. Moors, ante, 518. There is nothing in the point that the proceeding should have been brought in the Supreme Judicial Court under G. L. (Ter. Ed.) c. 167, § 24. That section relates to the liability of stockholders in domestic banks, not to contract obligations arising elsewhere. Cosmopolitan Trust Co. v. Cohen, 244 Mass. 128. The declaration set out a good cause of action. Superintendent of Banks of New York v. Moors, ante, 518.

Order sustaining demurrer and plea reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 N.E.2d 557, 294 Mass. 524, 1936 Mass. LEXIS 1251, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/superintendent-of-banks-of-new-york-v-fenton-mass-1936.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack