Taylor v. Attrill

New York Supreme Court

Taylor v. Attrill

38 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 132

DecidedDecember 15, 1883

StatusPublished

This text of 38 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 132 (Taylor v. Attrill) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Taylor v. Attrill, 38 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 132 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1883).

Pincite

Opinion

Barnard, P., J.:

This action is brought by a creditor against a director of an incorporated company, for the reason that the defendant had made, and caused to be recorded in Queens county, a false certificate that the •capital stock of the company had all been paid in. The company was organized for building and carrying on a hotel in that county. The cause- of action is local, and must be tried in the county where the same or some part thereof arose. ( Veeder v. Baker, 83 N. Y., 156.) The action is given where a false report is “ made.” (Laws of 1875, chap. 611, § 21.)

The same act requires this certificate to be recorded in Queens county. (Sec. 37.) The liability of the director by that section is made absolute for all debts of the company until this certificate is “ made and reporded.” It is then only by the recording that the act is complete which releases the director personally. We think, therefore, that the word “made” in one section, and the words u made and recorded” in the other, intend'no different result. An unrecorded certificate is not made. The cause of action was one •originally in Queens county, and the order must be affirmed, with costs and disbursements.

Dykman, J., concurred; Pratt, L, dissented.

Order refusing to change the place of trial affirmed, with costs and disbursements.

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

Barnard, P., J.:

This action is brought by a creditor against a director of an incorporated company, for the reason that the defendant had made, and caused to be recorded in Queens county, a false certificate that the •capital stock of the company had all been paid in. The company was organized for building and carrying on a hotel in that county. The cause- of action is local, and must be tried in the county where the same or some part thereof arose. ( Veeder v. Baker, 83 N. Y., 156.) The action is given where a false report is “ made.” (Laws of 1875, chap. 611, § 21.)

The same act requires this certificate to be recorded in Queens county. (Sec. 37.) The liability of the director by that section is made absolute for all debts of the company until this certificate is “ made and reporded.” It is then only by the recording that the act is complete which releases the director personally. We think, therefore, that the word “made” in one section, and the words u made and recorded” in the other, intend'no different result. An unrecorded certificate is not made. The cause of action was one •originally in Queens county, and the order must be affirmed, with costs and disbursements.

Dykman, J., concurred; Pratt, L, dissented.

Order refusing to change the place of trial affirmed, with costs and disbursements.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

38 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 132, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/taylor-v-attrill-nysupct-1883.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack