WILLIAM T. LEIGHTON, on Behalf of Himself and All Other Creditors of the LEIGHTON LEA ASSOCIATION, Appellant,
THE LEIGHTON LEA ASSOCIATION and Others, Respondents.
APPEAL by the plaintiff, William T. Leighton, on behalf of himself, etc., from an interlocutory judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the defendants, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Monroe on the 4th day of November, 1910, upon the decision of the court rendered after a trial at the Monroe Special Term.
Burlew Hill, for the appellant.
William De Graff, for the respondents S. Emily Platt and others.
Ednor A. Marsh, for the respondents Homer Knapp and Sarah J. Amos.
Joseph Lee Humphrey, for the respondents Frederick Frank and Lillie Fyles.
George D. Reed, for the respondents Dorothea Fladd and others.
Charles M. Williams, for the respondent Julia P. Salter.
John S. Bronk, for the respondents Mary B. White and others.
Heman W. Morris, for the respondents Augustus J. Reibling and others.
Isaac Adler, for the respondents Lee Richmond and Simon Adler.
C. J. Browning, for the respondent George A. Redman.
The object of this action is to make the stockholders or members of the Leighton Lea Association, a domestic corporation, personally liable for the debts of the association. The suit is based upon two judgments, executions having been issued thereon and returned wholly unsatisfied. One, a judgment of $26,077.70, deficiency in foreclosure of a mortgage accompanied by a bond, made by the association for a part of the purchase price of certain real property sold to it, and the other for $216.95, recovered upon a promissory note made by the association.
The bond and mortgage were executed July 8, 1891, payable in ten years, and time of payment was extended from July 8, 1901, to January 8, 1903. The note was made December 2, 1899, payable thirty days after its date. The foreclosure action was commenced October 25, 1902, default having been made in payment of interest, and the judgment for deficiency entered July 27, 1903. The action on the note was commenced October 20, 1902, and judgment entered thereon October 28, 1902. This action was commenced August 28, 1906.
Two grounds of liability are asserted against ...