Opinion · New York Court of Appeals
New Castle Siding Co. v. Wolfson
63 N.Y.2d 782
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- New York Court of Appeals
- Jurisdiction
- New York
- Date
- 1984-10-09
- Topic
- general
*784OPINION OF THE COURT Memorandum. The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs. Appellant, whose cross claim is asserted in his individual capacity, seeks to recover for the delinquent taxes and penalties he has paid on behalf of the corporation and for loans made to the corporation above and beyond his initial investment. The former were made in appellant’s capacity as an officer or employee of the corporation (see US Code, tit 26, § 6671, subd [b]; § 6672; Tax Law, §§ 1085, 1131, 1134) and would be the result of respondent’s negligence, if any, in discharging his obligations to the corporation for which he would not be responsible to a stockholder (cf. White v Guarente, 43 NY2d 356).
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed New Castle Siding Co. v. Wolfson. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Cited by
- 26 opinions
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.
Appellant, whose cross claim is asserted in his individual capacity, seeks to recover for the delinquent taxes and penalties he has paid on behalf of the corporation and for loans made to the corporation above and beyond his initial investment. The former were made in appellant’s capacity as an officer or employee of the corporation (see US Code, tit 26, § 6671, subd [b]; § 6672; Tax Law, §§ 1085, 1131, 1134) and would be the result of respondent’s negligence, if any, in discharging his obligations to the corporation for which he would not be responsible to a stockholder (cf. White v Guarente, 43 NY2d 356). In making the loans, appellant acted as a general creditor of the corporation, to whom it is well settled that no duty is owed by an accountant (see Ultramares Corp. v Touche, 255 NY 170). Thus, in neither case can appellant, as an individual shareholder, have recovery against respondent.
Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Jones, Meyer, Simons and Kaye concur; Judge Wachtler taking no part.
Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.