New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1860-03-31
LAW INTELLIGENCE
SUPREME COURT-sPpcIAL TExN--MaRoH ss-Se'ofe
Judge HoaEB0oN.

SUPREME COURT-sPycIAL TEgN--MARoH sS-oeofe
Judge HoeEsoos.
SHORT INDIA RUBBER SUIT -, n
Spencer T. Psrmee agRins; Chiiropher Meyer ana Jun"
Cbss O,copor Jod0e Foote. and hslf dozsu law
tried the profits nsa y roved thst tue
tpSs sSss or p Of pSa made BY the feTd
Rubber cS%PsII was 0s as aaSssf cc@py whO.s
PAR value hundred des u nov ,h neT cent per an
dollars share 19 s Sss that he North Brush c0%psny
estehes in ey s 70 IN Jul, Of the year
shsre nouiDsy Of floe bit on sPn '"' P' up
org scush By the pna to 200 shares Of
the Ford Rubber sc so & su5 james BsSOe pas
e 81 frndsnis se and fraudulent representa-
tone ,Ss ;S sa be 9as working employ q Com
psDy whose business was by ee s @
divided into shares Of l0o eAch that 10 1855 At the
ss that during the year he len the enpOymeht Of the Ford
RnbbT Co ct the request Of TIE Seenden s9or or
~sSasers and Contributor Of cnefs Of the cep that in
S Meyer Edobsh and stated to the Psietih that
wss smpO~sedt dsPAe the plaintiff in the 'itus,on he
IF inc Sce x: f and
It they pleased ana could give the whole Com,
he psnt nom receiving In future any dividends thst
the stock the books at $50 share and wa. only
worth at aud that the psai chose to take that price for
e sock he have thai but not he would do worse an
that event tee Company was Dat mere SS
verb on The books That the penth had aysys whsn
Ia the United states. attended eNcus1vey
partnen Of the Company that be never examined unto OF
knew DyihDg tie books Affairs Of the Company other
than the aancl in the manufacturing
that be lad been sbsent three om the county tn ne
only knew shout the Company from what the defendants
him. that becoming alarmed by the threats ana De
hevng the defendant Meyer he sold his stock
nj that AFTER he retained to the United
he stated the defendant Ford bow he mad 6sen IN
duced 70 part with his stock that the said fotd
replied that be equally interested with Meyer
in the purchase Of the stock snd was eq1suy re,
sponsible Cor what Meyer bsd said and done that
the plaintiff could not help himself; that the ComPs
copaTtner hip that the defendants had hight 20
the stock and pay whist worth uoon the books and
the they issued ostes o the STOCK was merely
for their convenience and thev would bin two thousand
dollars order they might ne friends which was done
some Gays aer and previous to his discovery Of tie ay Oh
the deiendants statements representations inc psinu
nItT that the epresenoDs aud statements Of the de-
pdAp were untrue and made by the defendants 10 deceive
ock and still worth $500 per share and mas
Usvt canned Of Thirty cent per annum on us
and defendants be9g the directors aud trustees
Of The Company well this fact and consPited together 70
consideration. by their Representations and statements
and that plaintiff thereby deceived and suduenty IN
uce6 10 psrt With sell 10 the defendants his stock
The plaintiff sets forth that he has recently the
frauds acced upon him by the defendants aud offers - reGr
the moneys paid i'm with interest having the stock
transferred back 20 him. sp6 being pd all poa' and dviends
earned The psui aks that the deendsns my De
and transfer back to him the two hundred
lses stock him such dividends aud profits a. they
sy received be entitled 70 receive thereon and hs'
COMPANY Of the stock EN- trom the pant
be delivered be cancelled and that in the mean tine
Abe defendants be restrained from transferring or dis
posing ofthe stock In controversy.
The the defendants admits the sale and transfer OF
the stock but denies the allegations offraud
-