Summary
In Emmerich v. Central Hanover Bank Trust Co. (supra) we held that the rights of a bondholder in the case of a breach of a fiduciary duty not involving a surrender or release of the mortgaged property arise from the fiduciary relation between the trustee and the beneficiary and are purely personal to each bondholder. They exist independently of and without regard to the mortgaged property and do not pass with a transfer of the bonds.
Summary of this case from Smith v. Continental Bank Trust Co. of N.YOpinion
Submitted May 27, 1943
Decided July 20, 1943
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, LEVY, J.
Isidor Enselman and Howard Hilton Spellman for appellant.
Francis S. Bensel, Alexander M. Lewis and W. Frederick Knecht for respondent.
Judgment affirmed, with costs, on authority of Elkind v. Chase National Bank ( 259 App. Div. 661, affd. 284 N.Y. 726) and Hendry v. Title Guarantee Trust Co. ( 255 App. Div. 497, affd. 280 N.Y. 740). No opinion.
Concur: LEHMAN, Ch. J., LOUGHRAN, RIPPEY, LEWIS, CONWAY, DESMOND and THACHER, JJ.