The Butler County press. [volume] (Hamilton, Ohio) 1900-1946, 1916-06-30
IMPORTANT LEGAL DECISION
New York Court of Appeals Rules That
TO Pay He Shall Liquidate Debts
Due For Labor Performed-Briei
History of interesting Case.

History of interesting Case.
The New York court of appeals has
Just decided that individual stockhold-
ers are responsible for the salary of an
employee and that II only one stock
holder Is able to pay he shall liquidate
the debt. The suit In which the de-
cision has been given was that of
William Farnum against William H.
Harrison and other stockholders of the
Wishart Dayton Auto Truck company
Farnum's salary was $50 a week, and
when the company went out Of the
auto truck business it owed the plain
tiff about 500.
Various defenses to the suit were
set up in an attempt to make 1t appear
that Farnum's case did not come with
In section 81 Of the stock corporation
law, which provides that
'The shareholders of every stock cor
poration shall Jointly and severally be
personally liable for all debts due and
owing to any of its laborers, servants
or employees other than contractors for
services performed by them for such
corporation. Before such laborer, serv.
ant or employee shall charge such
stockholder for such services he shall
give him notice In writing within thir
ty days after the termination OF such
services that he intends to hold him Ii.
able, and shall commence an action
therefor within thirty days after the
return Of an execution unsatisfied
against the corporation upon judg-
ment recovered against it for services p"
Louis Boehm, Farnum's counsel, first
got Judgment In the supreme court.
The judgment was affirmed by the ap.
pellate division, and now the highest
court In the state holds that as it APP
pears, the plaintiff was employed
by the company as a bookkeeper and
that bookkeepers come within the
! meaning OF SEXTON 81 and that for fail.
ure to pay his salary the stockholders.
individually, can be held personally Ii.
able.
One Of the decisions cited in Mr.
Boehm's brief said:
''The word employees as used IN
this statute has broad and compre-
hensive signifcation and includes all
persons who are employed 1t is de.
rived from the French word 'employe'
and lexically means one who is en-
ployed. Neither construction nor In.
depreciation can make 1t mean or sig
Nifty any other thing or describe any
other person or exclude any one who Is
employed from It's scope and operation
THE bookkeeper appellant was EN-
ployed by the company to keep Its
books. He therefore falls directly with
In the class of persons whom the
statute was designed to protect, and il
required strained and unnatural con
struction to exclude him from tbe bene
fits thereof"
Mr.. Boehm In his brief said:
"It is apparent from the language
Of the various decisions referred to thai
those employees are protected by the
statute who, being continuously EN-
ployed In the corporate business for q
compensation paid In wages or in sal
aries and being under the orders of the
managers of the corporation, are usu
ally regarded as It's servants or em
ployees.
THAT bookkeeper is one who Is
continuously employed In a subordinate
capacity cannot be doubted. Under the
cases cited the plaintiff is protected b.
the statute"