Franklin v. Dick
| Decision Date | 04 December 1941 |
| Citation | 287 N.Y. 656,39 N.E.2d 282 |
| Parties | Arthur H. FRANKLIN et al., Respondents, v. Fairman R. DICK et al., Appellants. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, 262 App.Div. 299, 28 N.Y.S.2d 426.
Submission of a controversy on an agreed statement of facts pursuant to section 546, of the Civil Practice Act by Arthur H. Franklin, as treasurer of the New York Stock Exchange, and others, plaintiffs, against Fairman R. Dick and others, as trustees of the gratuity fund of the New York Stock Exchange, defendants. The submission presented the question of the validity of an amendment to the constitution of the New York Stock Exchange adopted by the members on March 26, 1941. Under the former constitution only the income from a fund known as the gratuity fund might be used to reduce the amount which members would be called upon to pay each year by reason of assessments. The amendment permitted under certain circumstances, the use of part of the principal as well as the income from the fund, and the question involved was whether the amendment impaired any vested rights of members. The trustees of the gratuity fund raised the issue, seeking to have the question determined before recognizing the validity of the amendment.
Since 1873 provision had been made in the constitution of the Exchange for a gratuity plan providing for the payment to the family of each deceased member of an amount which originally was fixed at $10,000 and later increased to $20,000. In connection with the plan, provision was made for the establishment of a fund to be known as the gratuity fund which was to be built up from initial fees paid by new members, from contributions by the Exchange of a portion of the profits, and from accumulated interest on the invested capital of the fund. Though the provisions concerning building up of the fund had changed from time to time, the constitution at all times provided for payment of gratuities solely from assessments imposed in a fixed amount on living members upon the death of each fellow member.
From a judgment of the Appellate Division for plaintiffs, 262 App.Div. 299, 28 N.Y.S.2d 426, defendants appeal by leave of the Appellate Division, 262 App.Div. 847, 29 N.Y.S.2d 146. Plaintiffs-respondents contend that defendants-appellants are wrong in their assertion that the purpose of the gratuity fund was that it should be the source and security for the payment of death benefits...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Brown v. Gilligan, Will & Co.
...of the exchange with each other and with the exchange itself. See Franklin v. Dick, 262 App.Div. 299, 28 N.Y.S.2d 426, aff'd, 287 N.Y. 656, 39 N.E.2d 282 (1941); Cohen v. Thomas, 209 N.Y. 407, 103 N.E. 708 (1913). National League of Commission Merchants of the United States v. Hornung, 148 ......
- Nejla K. Lane & Lane Legal Servs., P.C. v. Le Brocq, 15 C 6177
-
Hartford Acc. & Indem. Co. v. Walston & Co.
...of which Bache & Co. and defendant were both members (Franklin v. Dick, 262 App.Div. 299, 301--303, 28 N.Y.S.2d 426, affd. 287 N.Y. 656, 39 N.E.2d 282). Nothing in former sections 162, 166 or 168 of the Personal Property Law makes the duty of a selling broker to know his customer null and v......
-
U.S. v. American Soc. of Composers, Authors
...discretion in prescribing its rules as long as the adopted rules are in accordance with law and all members agree), aff'd, 287 N.Y. 656, 39 N.E.2d 282 (1941). Although Warren argues that an opposite conclusion is required by Sections 4 and 5 of the Membership Agreement, we find that he has ......