Matter of Bergdorf

56 Citing cases

  1. Estate of Barreiro

    125 Cal.App. 153 (Cal. Ct. App. 1932)   Cited 16 times

    The appellee was entitled to execute the trust, and the chancellor did not err in overruling the demurrer.' To the same effect are the Matter of the Will etc. of Bergdorf, 206 N.Y. 309 [ 99 N.E. 714]; McElwain Co. v. Primavera, 181 App. Div. 929 [168 N.Y. Supp. 1134]; see latter case also reported in 180 App. Div. 288 [167 N.Y. Supp. 815]."

  2. McElwain Co. v. Primavera

    180 A.D. 288 (N.Y. App. Div. 1917)   Cited 20 times

    It seems to me that under this statute nothing is lost by a merger; that the company formed by the merger stands in the place of those merged, and any right which belonged to them can be asserted by it โ€” "it shall acquire and become, and be possessed of all the estate, property, rights, privileges and franchises of such other corporation, * * * without change or diminution." In Matter of Bergdorf ( 206 N.Y. 309) testator had executed his will November 2, 1904. He appointed as executors thereof and trustees of the trusts created two individuals and the Morton Trust Company, "and the survivors and successors of them."

  3. Ex Parte Worcester Nat. Bank

    279 U.S. 347 (1929)   Cited 32 times

    Congress may constitutionally provide for succession by a consolidated corporation, as an incident of the consolidation, to all rights as trustee, executor or administrator which were held by the constituent or absorbed corporations. Iowa Light Co. v. First Nat'l Bank, 250 Mass. 353; Mercantile Trust Co. v. San Joaquin Agricultural Corp'n, 265 P. 583; McElwain v. Primavera, 167 N.Y.S. 815; Chicago Title Co. v. Zinser, 264 Ill. 31; In re Bergdorf's Will, 206 N.Y. 309; In re Turner's Estate, 277 Pa. 110; Petition of Bank, 249 Mass. 240. Transmutation of a state bank into a national bank pursuant to congressional authority, does not destroy the bank's identity or its corporate existence.

  4. First Nat. Bank v. Chapman Co.

    22 S.W.2d 245 (Tenn. 1929)   Cited 3 times

    (Post, p. 78.) Cases cited and approved: Matter of Bergdorf, 206 N.Y. 309; Chicago Title Trust Co. v. Zinser, 264 Ill. 31; Petition of Worcester County National Bank (Mass.), 162 N.E. 217; U.S. Supreme Court Decision May 13, 1929. 5. EXECUTORS AND ADMINISTRATORS. Banks and banking.

  5. Irvine v. New York Edison Co.

    207 N.Y. 425 (N.Y. 1913)   Cited 17 times

    Such right rests upon the express terms of the statute and does not necessarily depend, as has been suggested, upon the existence and a finding of a fraudulent transfer. This court has recently considered the effect of a merger of banking corporations. ( Matter of Bergdorf, 206 N.Y. 309.) Upon a merger of banking corporations (Banking Law [Cons. Laws, ch. 2], ยงยง 36 to 40 inclusive) it is expressly provided that the corporation into which they are merged shall "be held liable to pay and discharge all such debts and liabilities, and to perform all such trusts of the merged corporation in the same manner as if such corporation into which the other shall become merged had itself incurred the obligation or liability." But it is provided by the statute that no "action or other proceeding then pending before any court or tribunal in which any corporation that may be merged is a party shall be deemed to have abated or discontinued by reason of any such merger, but the same may be prosecuted to final judgment in the same manner as if the said corporation had not entered into the said agreement.

  6. Worth Corp. v. Metro. Cas. Ins. Co. of N.Y

    142 Misc. 734 (N.Y. App. Term 1932)   Cited 10 times
    Finding the defendant was not responsible for debts following a merger

    The identity of the principal was extinguished on November 15, 1930. Matter of Bergdorf ( 206 N.Y. 309) is very consistent with these views. It was there decided that the right of the Morton Trust Company to serve as executor under a will was a right which by operation of the statute vested in the Guaranty Trust Company, into which the Morton Trust Company had been merged.

  7. Estate of Barnett

    97 Cal.App. 138 (Cal. Ct. App. 1929)   Cited 16 times

    ( Mercantile Trust Co. v. San Joaquin Agr. Corp., 89 Cal.App. 558 [ 265 P. 583, 589], citing Chicago, T. T. Co. v. Zinser, 264 Ill. 31, 35 [Ann. Cas. 1915D, 931, 105 N.E. 718], In re Bergdorf's Will, 206 N.Y. 309 [ 99 N.E. 714], McElwain Co. v. Primavera, 180 App. Div. 288 [167 N.Y. Supp. 815], Id., 181 App. Div. 929, 930 [168 N.Y. Supp. 1134], and directing attention to the fact that the statutes of Illinois and of New York, which were interpreted by the cited cases, were similar to the provisions of the California Bank Act.)

  8. Mercantile Etc. Co. v. San Joaquin Etc. Corp.

    89 Cal.App. 558 (Cal. Ct. App. 1928)   Cited 17 times

    " To the same effect are the Matter of the Will, etc., of Bergdorff, 206 N.Y. 309 [ 99 N.E. 714]; McElwain Co. v. Primavera, 181 App. Div. 929 [168 N.Y. Supp. 1134]; see latter case also reported in 180 App. Div. 288 [167 N.Y. Supp. 815]. [2] The soundness of the conclusions pronounced in the foregoing cases is not seriously disputed by counsel for the defendant.

  9. Matter of Griffin

    193 Misc. 419 (N.Y. Surr. Ct. 1948)   Cited 3 times

    The rule grows out of the fundamental principle, universally recognized, that effect shall be given to the will of a testator when not contrary to the rules of law, as such will, and the intent of the author of it can be gathered from the whole instrument. ( Hartnett v. Wandell, 60 N.Y. 346; Matter of Bergdorf, 206 N.Y. 309; Matter of Walsh, 147 Misc. 281; Matter of Leland, 96 Misc. 419; Matter of Rath, 107 Misc. 598; McMaster v. Gould, 240 N.Y. 379.) The right to act as executor can, however, be forfeited upon filing objections as provided in section 96 of the Surrogate's Court Act, showing that the executor is incompetent to serve as such upon the ground specified in section 94 of the same act.

  10. Commissioner of Int. Revenue v. Oswego Falls

    71 F.2d 673 (2d Cir. 1934)   Cited 41 times
    Holding that an unsigned notice of deficiency was valid and stating that "[t]he statute does not require that it be signed"

    Section 280(c) of the act, 26 USCA ยง 1069(c), identifies the taxpayer whose period of limitation must expire within one year prior to the mailing of the notice of liability. It is the corporation that incurred the taxes and from whom they would be collectible if its existence had not terminated. The pulp and paper company was dissolved by the consolidation in 1922. Miner v. N.Y.C. H.R.R.R. Co., 123 N.Y. 242, 25 N.E. 339; Matter of Bergdorf, 149 App. Div. 529, 133 N.Y.S. 1012, affirmed 206 N.Y. 309, 99 N.E. 714. It therefore did not consent to the waivers made in 1925 on which the Commissioner relies. Section 11 of the New York statute makes the new corporation the principal and the res itself is vested in it.