From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lincoln Sterling Corp. v. State Theatre Dunkirk

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Mar 8, 1939
256 App. Div. 1035 (N.Y. App. Div. 1939)

Opinion

March 8, 1939.

Present — Sears, P.J., Crosby, Lewis, Cunningham and Taylor, JJ.


Judgment so far as appealed from affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: The finding of the trial justice that the president of the plaintiff corporation made the statement upon which the estoppel is based was not, in view of all the circumstances, including the stock ownership of the plaintiff corporation, against the weight of the evidence. The authorization to the president to carry out the sale contained in the resolution of the corporation's stockholders with its lack of limitation, was sufficient to justify his binding the corporation by a statement substantially to the effect that the mortgage of the plaintiff corporation would be subordinated to the respondent's lease. All concur. (The portion of the judgment appealed from adjudges plaintiff's mortgage subordinate to the lease of the State Theatre Dunkirk, Inc., and denies foreclosure as against said lease.)


Summaries of

Lincoln Sterling Corp. v. State Theatre Dunkirk

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Mar 8, 1939
256 App. Div. 1035 (N.Y. App. Div. 1939)
Case details for

Lincoln Sterling Corp. v. State Theatre Dunkirk

Case Details

Full title:LINCOLN STERLING CORPORATION and ADAM SCHWEDA, Appellants, v. STATE…

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

Date published: Mar 8, 1939

Citations

256 App. Div. 1035 (N.Y. App. Div. 1939)

Citing Cases

Texas Co. v. Z. M. Independent Oil Co.

The statute does not require any particular form of consent; hence the stockholders' resolution need not set…

Texas Co. v. Z. M. Independent Oil Co.

Zuber's own evidence as to his explanation of the transaction to the stockholders, and the knowledge of his…