Case Name: The People of the State of New York v. Metropolitan Mutual Savings and Loan Association; In the Matter of the Claims of Delilah Good et al., Appellants; James A. Roberts, as Receiver of Metropolitan Mutual Savings and Loan Association, Respondent
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1905-10-03
Citations: 182 N.Y. 531
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People of the State of New York v. Metropolitan Mutual Savings and Loan Association. In the Matter of the Claims of Delilah Good et al., Appellants; James A. Roberts, as Receiver of Metropolitan Mutual Savings and Loan Association, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 182
Pages: 531–532

Head Matter:
The People of the State of New York v. Metropolitan Mutual Savings and Loan Association. In the Matter of the Claims of Delilah Good et al., Appellants; James A. Roberts, as Receiver of Metropolitan Mutual Savings and Loan Association, Respondent.
(Argued May 31, 1905;
decided October 3, 1905.)
People v. Metropolitan Mut. S. & L. Assn., 103 App. Div. 153, affirmed.
Appeal, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Division.of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, entered March 15, 1905, which affirmed an order of Special Term confirming the report of a referee denying the claims of the appellants herein for. preference upon the distribution of the assets of the Metropolitan Mutual Savings and Loan Association.
The following questions were certified:
“ 1. Are the claimants holding shares in said corporation, known as Class E, entitled to the rights of creditors or preferred shareholders of said corporation, after its dissolution, as relating to any of the installment stocks in said corporation, and entitled to the payment by the receiver on the final distribution of the assets of the corporation, to the extent of the par value of such stock, in preference and prior to any payment being made by said receiver to holders of shares of any such installment stocks ?
“ 2. Are the claimants holding shares in said corporation, known as Class K, entitled to the rights of creditors or preferred shareholders of said corporation, after its dissolution, as relating to any of the installment stocks in said corporation, and entitled to the payment by the receiver on the final distribution of the assets of the corporation, to the extent of the par value of such stock, in preference and prior to any payment made by said receiver to holders of shares of any such installment stocks?
“ 3. Are the claimants holding stock in said corporation, known as Class H, entitled to the rights of creditors or preferred shareholders of said corporation, after its dissolution, as relating to any of the installment stocks in said corporation, and to the payment by the receiver on the final distribution of the assets of the corporation, to the extent of the paid-up value of such stock, in preference and prior to any payments being made by said receiver to claimants holding shares of any of the installment stock in said corporation % ”
Irving W. Cole, Fred Greiner, Charles R. Wilson, Philip S. Smith, Martin Clark, Stephen Lockwood, S. T. Lockwood and Bertrand W. Nye for appellants.
Clark H. Timerman for respondent.

Opinion:
Order affirmed, with costs, on opinion below, and the questions certified answered in the negative.
Concur: Cullen, Oh. J., Gray, O'Brien, Bartlett, Haight, Yann and Werner, JJ.