Case Name: Henry A. Caesar et al., Copartners under the Firm Name of H. A. Caesar & Co., Respondents, v. Robert W. Bernard et al., Defendants, and William M. Bernard, Appellant. Henry A. Caesar et al, Copartners under the Firm Name of H. A. Caesar & Co., Respondents, v. Robert W. Bernard, Appellant, Impleaded with Others. Henry A. Caesar et al., Copartners under the Firm Name of H. A. Caesar & Co., Respondents, v. Robert W. Bernard et al., Defendants, and W. Cleveland Runyon, Appellant
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1913-10-31
Citations: 209 N.Y. 570
Docket Number: 
Parties: Henry A. Caesar et al., Copartners under the Firm Name of H. A. Caesar & Co., Respondents, v. Robert W. Bernard et al., Defendants, and William M. Bernard, Appellant. Henry A. Caesar et al, Copartners under the Firm Name of H. A. Caesar & Co., Respondents, v. Robert W. Bernard, Appellant, Impleaded with Others. Henry A. Caesar et al., Copartners under the Firm Name of H. A. Caesar & Co., Respondents, v. Robert W. Bernard et al., Defendants, and W. Cleveland Runyon, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 209
Pages: 570–571

Head Matter:
Henry A. Caesar et al., Copartners under the Firm Name of H. A. Caesar & Co., Respondents, v. Robert W. Bernard et al., Defendants, and William M. Bernard, Appellant. Henry A. Caesar et al, Copartners under the Firm Name of H. A. Caesar & Co., Respondents, v. Robert W. Bernard, Appellant, Impleaded with Others. Henry A. Caesar et al., Copartners under the Firm Name of H. A. Caesar & Co., Respondents, v. Robert W. Bernard et al., Defendants, and W. Cleveland Runyon, Appellant.
Caesar v. Bernard, 166 App. Div. 724, 736, 737, affirmed.
(Argued October 20, 1913;
decided October 31, 1913.)
Appeal, by permission, in each of the above-entitled actions from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered May 15, 1913, which reversed an order of the Appellate Term affirming’ an order of the City Court of the City of New York granting a motion by defendants for judgment on the pleading’s in an action by judgment creditors of the Wyckoff Holding Company, a domestic corporation, against the former directors and officers of said company, who are alleged to have violated or been concerned in violating the provisions of section 66 (formerly section 48) of the Stock Corporation Law— prohibiting preferences by corporations which are insolvent or whose insolvency is imminent — to recover the damage sustained by plaintiffs through the violations of the statute by defendants.
The following question was certified: “Does the complaint state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action ? ”
W. Cleveland Runyon, Richard H. McIntyre, Jr., Claudius A. Hand, John Elton Wayland and Robert W. Bernard for appellants.
Henry L. Scheuerman, Herbert R. Limburg and Harry F. Mela for respondents.

Opinion:
Order in each appeal affirmed, with costs, on opinion of Laughlin, J., below, and questions certified answered in the affirmative.
Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Gray, Werner, Collin, CUDDEBAOK, HOGAN and MILLER, JJ.