From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

HITZ v. GARFINKEL

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 1, 1935
246 App. Div. 728 (N.Y. App. Div. 1935)

Summary

In Hitz v. Garfinkel, 246 App. Div. 728, 283 N.Y.S. 872, a receiver in supplementary proceedings was permitted to maintain an action under §§ 60 and 61 of the General Corporation Law for the value of corporate assets illegally transferred to directors.

Summary of this case from Klages v. Cohen

Opinion

December, 1935.


The action is brought to recover the value of property alleged to have been illegally transferred to certain directors, thereby denuding the corporation of assets and defeating and impairing the rights of creditors. It is brought under the provisions of sections 60 and 61 of the General Corporation Law and is in its nature one for conversion. The plaintiff was appointed as receiver in supplementary proceedings on the application of one judgment creditor. (See Civ. Prac. Act, § 805, as amd. by Laws of 1934, chap. 565.) The property of the defendants vested in the receiver. (Civ. Prac. Act, § 809.) So far as it appears in the record, there is only one other creditor, in comparatively small amount. What disposition or distribution of the property may be made after recovery is had is a question that does not now concern us. It will be a matter for the court to determine on an accounting when it may appear that other creditors are sufficiently vigilant to claim a share in the recovery. Such an action at law in behalf of the corporation is maintainable. ( People v. Equitable Life Assurance Society, 124 App. Div. 714, 733; Stephens v. Meriden Britannia Co., 160 N.Y. 178, 181; Whalen v. Strong, 230 App. Div. 617, 620.) Order denying defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint under rules 106 and 107 of the Rules of Civil Practice affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, with leave to answer within ten days from the entry of the order herein. Lazansky, P.J., Young, Hagarty, Tompkins and Davis, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

HITZ v. GARFINKEL

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 1, 1935
246 App. Div. 728 (N.Y. App. Div. 1935)

In Hitz v. Garfinkel, 246 App. Div. 728, 283 N.Y.S. 872, a receiver in supplementary proceedings was permitted to maintain an action under §§ 60 and 61 of the General Corporation Law for the value of corporate assets illegally transferred to directors.

Summary of this case from Klages v. Cohen
Case details for

HITZ v. GARFINKEL

Case Details

Full title:JOSEPH L. HITZ, as Receiver of ARABO COFFEE CO., INC., Respondent, v…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Dec 1, 1935

Citations

246 App. Div. 728 (N.Y. App. Div. 1935)

Citing Cases

Klages v. Cohen

For the most part the conclusion we reach finds support in decisions of the Appellate Division of the New…

Buttles v. Smith

In the present action an accounting is alleged to be necessary and is necessary. Upon the issues raised upon…