TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Barnes v. Arnold

Charles A. Barnes Et Al., Respondents, v. John J. Arnold Et Al., Defendants, and William W. Trevor Et Al., Appellants

Barnes v. Arnold, 62 N.E. 1101 (N.Y. 1902)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
New York Court of Appeals · State Highest Courts
Decided
January 28, 1902
Citations
62 N.E. 1101169 N.Y. 6111902 N.Y. LEXIS 1240
Summary
Appeal, by permission, from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered December 12, 1899, affirming an interlocutory judgment entered after a decision in favor of plaintiffs rendered by the court at an Equity Term. The following are the questions certified : Fvrst. Is section 52 of chapter 689 of the Laws of 1892, known as the Banking Law, in so far as it seeks to increase and extend the liability of stockholders who, at the time said act took effect, were stockholders of the Merchants’ Bank of Lockport, a state bank then and theretofore existing, constitutional, under that clause of the Constitution of the United States which prohibits legislation impairing the obligation of contracts ? Second. Was the extension of the liability of such stockholders by said section 52 of the Banking Law prohibited by sections 1 to 8 inclusive, of article VIII of the Constitution of the state of New York of 1846 ? Third. Were deposits made in the Merchants’ Bank of Lockport, in the ordinary course of business, or upon certificates of deposit made by their terms payable upon the return of such certificates properly indorsed, obligations for which the stockholders of such bank were liable, under said section 52, as limited by section 55 of chapter 688 of the Laws of 1892, known as the Stock Corporation Law %

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court

Judgment affirmed, with costs, on the opinions below. First and third cpiestions answered in the affirmative and the second question in the negative.

Concur: Pabkeb, Oh. J., G-ray, O’Brien, Babtlett, Haight, Martin and Vann, JJ.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 10 cases

View all citing references →
1906: 11910: 11911: 11912: 11914: 21917: 11933: 11935: 11936: 119062026peak 1914 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Rainey v. Michel57 P.2d 932 (Cal. 1936)
  2. Broderick v. Adamson148 Misc. 353 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1933)
  3. Cheney v. Scharmann145 A.D. 456 (1911)
  4. Van Tuyl v. Schwab165 A.D. 412 (1914)
  5. People v. Merchants' Trust Co.116 A.D. 41 (1906)
  6. Richards v. Gill138 A.D. 75 (1910)

Most recent

  1. Rainey v. Michel57 P.2d 932 (Cal. 1936)
  2. Broderick v. Aaron243 A.D. 411 (1935)
  3. Broderick v. Adamson148 Misc. 353 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1933)
  4. Richards v. Charles101 Misc. 128 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1917)
  5. Van Tuyl v. Schwab165 A.D. 412 (1914)
  6. Van Tuyl v. Schwab85 Misc. 172 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1914)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list