3 Cal.App.2d 154, 5256, Cooper v. Cooper

Docket Nº:5256
Citation:3 Cal.App.2d 154, 39 P.2d 820
Party Name:Cooper v. Cooper
Case Date:December 18, 1934
Court:California Court of Appeals
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 154

3 Cal.App.2d 154

39 P.2d 820

STUART F. COOPER, Appellant,

v.

MILTON G. COOPER, Defendant and Respondent

HATTIE MAY COOPER, Intervener and Respondent. [Civ. No. 5257. Third Appellate District. December 18, 1934.] HATTIE MAY COOPER, Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

STUART F. COOPER, Appellant

MILTON G. COOPER et al., Defendants and Respondents.

Civ. No. 5256., Civ. No. 5257.

California Court of Appeal, Third District

December 18, 1934

Page 155

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 156

COUNSEL

Zach Lamar Cobb and Earl A. Littlejohns for Appellant. Barker &amp Keithly and Dunne &amp Dunne for Respondents

OPINION

[39 P.2d 821] Thompson, J.

The above-entitled cases were consolidated for the purpose of trial. Separate findings and judgments were rendered in each case. Separate appeals were perfected from the respective judgments. They were brought to this court and presented on a single transcript of evidence. The determination of the main issues of both cases depends on the same evidence.

The plaintiff Stuart F. Cooper has appealed from a judgment in the first case which was rendered against him in a suit on a promissory note. The court found that the alleged note was given without consideration and that it is therefore void, and directed that it be canceled.

The defendant and the intervener are husband and wife. The plaintiff is their son. All of the corporation stock and money which are involved in this suit were the community property of the defendant and his wife. Since 1895 the parties to this action have been residents of Los Angeles. Until October 1, 1926, the defendant Milton G. Cooper maintained an incorporated mercantile business in Los Angeles under the name of Milton G. Cooper Dry Goods Company, having 20,000 shares of capital stock of the par value of $100 per share. Milton G. Cooper was the president of the corporation. On the date last mentioned the capital stock of the corporation was reduced to 12,000 shares of the par value of $100 per share. The defendant owned 65 per cent of the stock of this corporation. October 22, 1919, he gave to his son 150 shares of his stock, and on December 26, 1922, made him a present of 100 other shares. About the time of the

Page 157

original gift of stock to the son, he was taken into the business, and later became an officer therein.

This cause was tried by the court sitting without a jury. The court found that prior to November 20, 1924, the defendant Milton G. Cooper purchased a large number of shares of stock from other stockholders, for which he became obligated to pay the sum of $400,000; that he is still indebted for a considerable portion of that purchase price of the stock; that, on the last-mentioned date, the defendant transferred to the plaintiff 250 shares of his stock with the oral agreement that this stock together with all dividends subsequently paid thereon were to be held by his son in trust until the defendant's indebtedness was fully paid, and until, in the opinion of the defendant, his financial standing warranted him in requesting the plaintiff to reconvey the last-mentioned stock and accrued dividends to him; that by the terms of the oral trust agreement the defendant was authorized to use all such stock and accrued dividends as collateral security for any debts or obligations of the defendant; that pursuant to the same trust agreement the defendant on December 3, 1925, transferred to the plaintiff 250 additional shares of stock, and on the last-mentioned date there were issued and delivered to the plaintiff under that trust agreement 1666 other shares of stock as dividends on the stock held by the plaintiff; that subsequently 1600 shares of this dividend stock were transferred to the defendant Milton G. Cooper, and pledged by him to the Pacific Finance Company to secure a debt which he then owed that company; that these 1600 shares of dividend stock were redeemed by the defendant and reconveyed to the plaintiff subject to the same trust agreement, on December 30, 1927; that at the time of the reduction of the capital stock of the mercantile company, September 21, 1927, the plaintiff surrendered 1,000 shares of the stock which stood in his name, leaving only approximately 1500 shares in his name, all of which were subject to the trust agreement, except 250 shares thereof which belonged to him; that at the time of the reduction of the capital stock cash dividends on the shares owned and...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP