Case Name: THE QUARRY COMPANY a. BLISS
Court: New York Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1859-06
Citations: 10 Abb. Pr. 211
Docket Number: 
Parties: THE QUARRY COMPANY a. BLISS.
Judges: 
Reporter: Abbott's Practice Reports
Volume: 10
Pages: 211–212

Head Matter:
THE QUARRY COMPANY a. BLISS.
Supreme Court, First District;
Circuit June, 1859.
Liability of Trustees of Manufacturing Corporations.
Under section 12 of the act to incorporate manufacturing and other corporations, the trustees who have neglected to report are not personally liable for debts contracted after they ceased to hold office as such.
Trial by the court.
The action was brought by the Shaler & Hall Quarry Company, to enforce the liability of the defendants, George Bliss and. Charles Abernethy, as trustees of the Hudson River Stone Dressing Company, a corporation organized under the general manufacturing law of the State of Hew York, for acceptances, by said company, of the plaintiff’s drafts dated respectively on the 20th and 27th days of April, 1854, for the respective sums of $832.75, and $1209.40, both payable to the order of plaintiff at three months after date, said drafts having been drawn against cargoes of Connecticut brown-stone sold and delivered by plaintiff to said company, between the 19th and 27th days of said April. The liability sought to be enforced was that imposed by the 12th section of the General Manufacturing Corporations Act of February 17, 1848. It was admitted by the pleadings that the annual report required by the 12th section was not filed or published within twenty days from the first day of January, 1854, nor until the 31st day of July, 1854. The evidence showed that no part of the stone furnished by plaintiff was delivered until after 18th April, 1854; and that the defendants ceased to be trustees of said company on that day, their term of office having previously expired, and an annual election having on that day taken place, at which their successors in office were duly elected.
There were other points taken in the case, upon which no opinion was expressed.
The cause was tried on the 9th of June, 1859, before Hon. Josiah Sutherland, justice, without a jury, who rendered his decision, June 28, 1859, in favor of defendants, as follows:
H. & C. S. Andrews, for plaintiffs.
Charles F. Sandford, for defendants.

Opinion:
Per Sutherland, J.
—It appears from the evidence in this case, that the debt which the plaintiff seeks to recover in this action was not contracted, and did not accrue, until after the 18th of April, 1854, and that the defendants, Bliss and Abernethy, ceased to be trustees on that day. On that ground alone, I think the defendants Bliss and Abernethy must have judgment against the plaintiffs with costs. It is unnecessary to pass upon any other questions in the case.