
    George C. Van Tuyl, Jr., as Superintendent of Banks of the State of New York, Respondent, v. David A. Sullivan et al., Defendants, and Theobald Engelhardt et al., Appellants.
    
      Van Tuyl v. Sullivan, 171 App. Div. —, affirmed.
    (Argued February 29, 1916;
    decided March 14, 1916.)
    Appeal, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered December 8, 1915, which affirmed an order of Special Term granting a motion by plaintiff for judgment in his favor on the pleadings. The action was instituted by the superintendent of banks of the state of . New York to enforce the statutory liability of the defendants as stockholders of the Union Bank of Brooklyn, an insolvent banking corporation. Some of the defendants have interposed separate demurrers to the complaint. The grounds stated are: First, because the plaintiff has no legal capacity to sue, for the reason that (a) suit must be in the name of the hank; (b) in general the statutes attempting to give the superintendent of banks power to bring suits of this character are unconstitutional. Second, because the Union Bank is not made a party. Third, because the complaint .does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action.
    The following question was certified: “Does the complaint herein state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action ? ”
    
      William G. Cooke and Howard O. Wood for appellants.
    
      Joseph G. Deane and Philip A. Walter for respondent.
   Order affirmed, with costs, and question certified answered in the affirmative; no opinion.

Concur: Willard Bartlett, Ch. J., Hiscock, Collin, Cuddeback, Hogan, Seabury and Pound, JJ.  