Coe v. Armour Fertilizer Works
Citations
- 237 U.S. 413
- 35 S. Ct. 625
- 59 L. Ed. 1027
- 1915 U.S. LEXIS 1349
Syllabus
<p>Where the case was tried twice below and twice went to the highest court of the State and the Federal question was decided adversely to plaintiff in error on the first appeal, he is not concluded thereby because he failed to then take a writ of error if it appears that the first judgment of the higher court did not finally dispose of the case but required further proceedings in the court below.</p> <p>Not until the judgment of the court of last resort is final will a writ of error lie to this court under § 237 Judicial Code.</p> <p>The contention that under the local practice on a second writ of error to the Supreme Court of the State a Federal question that was passed on at the first hearing is not open, cannot be sustained in this court if as a matter of fact the state court did pass on the question on the second hearing and decide it adversely to plaintiff in error.</p> <p>Any course of procedure having for its object the taking of property to satisfy an alleged legal obligation without according any hearing to a respectful protest invoking the supreme law of the land cannot be regarded as due process of law.</p> <p>Section 2677, General Statutes of Florida of 1906 as amended in 1909, as construed by the highest court of the State, is repugnant to the due process provision of the Fourteenth. Amendment in so far as'it allows, after execution has been returned “no property” against a corporation, an execution to issue against a stockholder for the same debt to be enforced against his property to the extent of his unpaid subscription as the same appears on the books of the corporation without notice to such stockholder or other preliminary step.</p> <p>While a judgment against a corporation without fraud or collusion in a court having jurisdiction may be made conclusive upon the stockholder, as to existence and amount of the debt, the property of a third party may not be taken to satisfy that debt upon the ground that he is a stockholder and indebted to the corpo
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- writ of execution against a stockholder of defendant corporation against which the judgment had been obtained
- due process requires notice to third party before its property is subject to execution
- “Nor can extra-official or casual notice, or a hearing granted as a matter of favor or discretion, be deemed a substantial substitute for the due process of law that the Constitution requires.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Pitney
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.