Case Name: BARCLAY against THE QUICKSILVER MINING COMPANY
Court: New York Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1870
Citations: 9 Abb. Pr. 283
Docket Number: 
Parties: BARCLAY against THE QUICKSILVER MINING COMPANY.
Judges: 
Reporter: Abbott's Practice Reports
Volume: 9
Pages: 283–285

Head Matter:
BARCLAY against THE QUICKSILVER MINING COMPANY.
. Cobpobation. —Attachment. —Receives. —Pasties.
A creditor of a foreign corporation may pursue his demand against a corporation formed in this State, to whom the property of the foreign corporation has been transferred, in consideration of the issue of shares of stock in the New York company, to the shareholders of the foreign company.
After such a creditor has recovered judgment in the State of the foreign corporation, and obtained the appointment of a sequestrator of that company, a receiver of the domestic' corporation may be appointed in the sequestrator’s suit brought in this State.
Where the business affected and the interests involved were very large, the court gave defendants leave to file security within a specified time, and granted the appointment of a receiver, only in default thereof.
A motion for a receiver should not be denied merely on the ground that third persons are necessary parties, for they may be subsequently brought in.
Motion for a receiver.
This action was brought by Richard D. Barclay, sequestrator, &c., of the Quicksilver Mining Company of Pennsylvania, against the Quicksilver Mining Company of Hew York. Mr. Black, of Pennsylvania, having recovered a large judgment against the stockholders in the Pennsylvania company, and attached the stock of the debtors in that company, and the company having failed to surrender the stock, Barclay was appointed in Pennsylvania, a sequestrator of the property of the company. Meanwhile, the defendant in this suit, a new corporation, had been organized under the laws of the State of Hew York, and the property and business of the Pennsylvania company had been transferred to the new company ; and thereupon the present suit was brought to establish against the Hew York company the judgment recovered against the Pennsylvania company, and the plaintiff now asked for a receiver.
Strong & Shepard, for the motion.

Opinion:
Ingraham, J.
There can be no doubt but that the' property of the Pennsylvania company was transferred to the Hew York company, upon no other consideration than the issue of shares of stock of the company, which went to the shareholders of the Pennsylvania company, and was subject to the payment of the debts of that company. Hor is there any doubt that a creditor of the first company has the right, after judgment, to follow that property in the possession of the Hew York company. For the purpose of enforcing payment of the plaintiff's judgment the property belonging to the debtor; and, transferred without consideration to the Hew York company, may be followed while in their possession, and made applicable to the payment of the debt. At the same time, considering the extent of defendant's business, and the vast interests involved, I do not think a receiver should be appointed without giving the defendants the opportunity of avoiding the same by giving security. For this purpose the defendant may have thirty days within which to file a bond with sufficient sureties, to be approved by a justice, to secure the plaintiff any recovery he may obtain in this case, and in default thereof, the motion for a receiver is granted.
The objection that the Philadelphia company is a necessary party, is no bar to granting the motion. When the object is merely to collect a judgment, I do not think it necessary; but if it should be, that can be done hereafter by having the company brought in as defendants. •
Motion granted unless defendant files the bond, as above stated.