Case ID: nys_101/html/0270-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "GAYNOR, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

PEOPLE v. ANGLO-AMERICAN SAVINGS & LOAN ASS’N OF NEW YORK. In re DAVIS et al.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.
    November 28, 1906.)
    Motion—Place of Making.
    Where, in an action for the dissolution of a moneyed domestic corporation pending in Kings county, the Attorney General moved before the-Supreme Court at Special Term in Albany county for the passing of the accounts of the receiver, and due notice was given ail interested parties, and no opposition to the motion was made on the ground that it was not made in the proper place, the corporation would not be heard in Kings county on a motion to vacate the order made in Albany county granting the motion on the ground of irregularity; the court having had jurisdiction.
    [Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 35, Motions, § 6.]
    Appeal from Special Term, Kings County.
    Suit by the people to dissolve the Anglo-American Savings & Loan Association of New York, a corporation. The people appeal from an order vacating an order settling and passing the accounts of the permanent receiver. Reversed, and motion denied.
    See 94 N. Y. Supp. 1113.
    Argued before HIRSCHBERG, P. J., and WOODWARD, JENKS, HOOKER, and GAYNOR, JJ.
    Myer Nussbaum, Charles A. Deshon, and Alexander T. Mason, Deputy Atty. Gen., for appellants.
    Edward P. Lyon and George W. McKenzie, for respondents.
   GAYNOR, J.

This action for the dissolution of a domestic moneyed corporation was pending in the county of Kings, but the Attorney General gave notice of motion before the Supreme Court at Special-Term in Albany county for the passing of the accounts of the receiver. Due notice of the motion was given to every one interested, but no opposition to the motion or objection that it was not made in the proper place was made. After thus acquiescing in the motion being heard in Albany county, the respondents had no standing to make a motion in Kings county to vacate the order made in Albany county on the ground of irregularity. There was jurisdiction; the Supreme Court had jurisdiction ; the question of the county in which the motion should be made was one of regularity only.

The order should be reversed, and the motion denied.

Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with costs. All concur.