Featured Chrome Extensions:

Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

liabilitystatutetrialcorporationmisdemeanor
liabilitystatutecorporationmisdemeanor

Related Cases

Wright v. Pennamped, 657 N.E.2d 1223
View Case »
Robinson v. State, 373 So.2d 898
View Case »
In re Thirty-Third Statewide Investigating Grand Jury, 624 Pa. 361, 86 A.3d 204
View Case »
In re Ferrey, 774 A.2d 62
View Case »
Law Students Civil Rights Research Council, Inc. v. Wadmond, 401 U.S. 154, 91 S.Ct. 720, 27 L.Ed.2d 749
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

Kane v. People, 8 Wend. 203

Facts

The Mohawk Turnpike and Bridge Company was incorporated in 1800, with a duty imposed on the president and directors to maintain the road in good repair. C. Kane, along with two other directors, was indicted for failing to repair a section of the road that had been in disrepair from January to June 1827. The indictment alleged that all three directors had notice of the road's condition and neglected their duty to maintain it, leading to a conviction for Kane alone after the trial.

The Mohawk Turnpike and Bridge Company was incorporated in 1800, with a duty imposed on the president and directors to maintain the road in good repair. C. Kane, along with two other directors, was indicted for failing to repair a section of the road that had been in disrepair from January to June 1827.

Issue

Whether an individual director of a turnpike company can be indicted for neglecting to keep the road in repair, despite the acquittal of other directors.

Whether an individual director of a turnpike company can be indicted for neglecting to keep the road in repair, despite the acquittal of other directors.

Rule

The act of incorporation declared that neglect to keep the road in repair was a misdemeanor for the president and individual directors, allowing for separate indictments and punishments.

The act of incorporation declared that neglect to keep the road in repair was a misdemeanor for the president and individual directors, allowing for separate indictments and punishments.

Analysis

The court determined that the statute imposed individual liability on directors for neglecting their duties, allowing for separate indictments. It ruled that the acquittal of two directors did not affect Kane's conviction, as each director's responsibility was independent. The court emphasized that the law allows for individual accountability even when a majority is required for corporate actions.

The court determined that the statute imposed individual liability on directors for neglecting their duties, allowing for separate indictments. It ruled that the acquittal of two directors did not affect Kane's conviction, as each director's responsibility was independent.

Conclusion

The court affirmed Kane's conviction and fine, ruling that he was individually liable for the neglect of duty as a director, regardless of the outcomes for his co-directors.

The court affirmed Kane's conviction and fine, ruling that he was individually liable for the neglect of duty as a director, regardless of the outcomes for his co-directors.

Who won?

The People of the State of New York prevailed, as the court upheld Kane's conviction for neglecting his duties as a director.

The People of the State of New York prevailed, as the court upheld Kane's conviction for neglecting his duties as a director.

You must be