# Nash v. Hall Signal Co.

> New York Supreme Court · November 15, 1895 · 97 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 354

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6220742

## Case

- **Full name:** Abbie S. Nash and Others v. The Hall Signal Company, Impleaded with Others
- **Court:** New York Supreme Court
- **Decided:** November 15, 1895
- **Citations:** 97 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 354; 70 N.Y. St. Rep. 655; 90 Hun 354
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court by Follett
- **Judges:** Brien, Brunt, Follett, Lawrence
- **Cited by:** 6 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6220742

## Opinion text

Follett, J.:
In case A and «B, directors in a corporation, waste its funds during one year, and B and 0, directors, by some act not connected with the first devastavit, waste its funds in another year, the three cannot be joined in an equitable action brought by or in behalf of the corporation to compel them to account for and pay the damages sustained by these independent, wrongful acts. Wasting the property of a corporation by its directors is a tort. A is not liable for the acts of B and 0, and C is not liable for the acts of A and B, and these independent, tortious acts constitute distinct causes of action which cannot be united in one complaint. .
The interlocutory judgment should be affirmed, with costs, on the opinion of Lawrence, J., at Special Term.
Yan Brunt, P. J., concurred.
Judgment affirmed, with costs.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6220742. Public record. Not legal advice.