Case ID: ny-sup-ct_13/html/0246-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Davis, P. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

JOHN S. PROUTY, Respondent, v. THE LAKE SHORE AND MICHIGAN SOUTHERN RAILROAD COMPANY, Appellant.
    
      Supplemental complaint — consolidation of corporations — acts authorizing, need, not l>e specifically alleged,.
    
    . Appeal from an order of the Special Term, denying a motion to strike out a supplemental complaint, and to strikeout portions thereof as irrelevant, or to have certain portions made more definite and certain.
    This action was brought against the Michigan Southern and Northern Indiana Railroad and others, to compel that corporation to apply its future net earnings to the payment of dividends upon its preferred stock.
    Hpon an appeal from an order confirming the report of a referee, it was decided by the General Term of this department (8 S’. O. [1 Hun], 655) that the action could not be maintained for the reason, that the corporation issuing the stock had ceased to exist, having become merged in a new corporation which had assumed all the obligations of its predecessors. Subsequently an order was made allowing the plaintiff to file a supplemental complaint, bringing in the Lake Shore and Michigan Southern Railroad Company as defendant. Upon this appeal it was held, by the General Term, that it was not necessary for the plaintiff to recite the specific acts of the legislature at length, or their several titles in the complaint. That it was sufficient for him to allege generally the consolidation of the defendants under the laws of the several States.
    
      Matthews da Foley, for appellant. Birdseye, Gloyd da Bayliss, for respondent.
   Opinion by

Davis, P. J.

Brady and Daniels, JJ., concurred.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.