National Bank of Commerce v. Allen

• Decision Date: 31 October 1898
• Docket Number: 1,037.
• Citation: 90 F. 545
• Parties: NATIONAL BANK OF COMMERCE IN DENVER v. ALLEN et al.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit

90 F. 545

NATIONAL BANK OF COMMERCE IN DENVER v. ALLEN et al.

No. 1,037.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

October 31, 1898

This was a creditors' bill, which was exhibited by George A Allen and others, the appellees, composing the firm of Paris Allen & Co., against the National Bank of Commerce in Denver the appellant, and against the A. K. Clarke Mercantile Company, hereafter termed the 'Mercantile Company.' The bill was filed by Paris, Allen & Co., as judgment creditors of the Mercantile Company, for their own benefit and for the benefit of such other judgment creditors of the Mercantile Company as might thereafter join in the proceeding and contribute to the expense thereof; whereupon several other judgment creditors of the Mercantile Company did unite in the proceedings and become parties complainant.

The relief sought is based upon ground set forth in the bill of complaint, which may be summarized as follows: The Mercantile Company was organized on or about April 26, 1893, under the laws of the state of Colorado, for the ostensible purpose of acquiring and succeeding to the business of A. K. Clark, who for some time previously had been engaged in the wholesale and retail liquor business in the city of Denver, Colo., which business was transacted in the name of A. K. Clarke & Co. The capital of the Mercantile Company was fixed at $200,000, consisting of 2,000 shares, of the par value of $100 each, and the stock was all issued to said Clarke and two other persons by him designated, as full-paid stock, in exchange for the stock of liquors, warehouse receipts, and other property formerly belonging to said Clark. 1,998 shares of said stock were issued to Clarke personally, and 1 share each to two other persons, who forthwith became directors and officers of the corporation. Clarke was at the time indebted to the National Bank of Commerce in Denver, the appellant, in the sum of $50,000, and he forthwith assigned the 1,998 shares of stock in the Mercantile Company to said bank, as collateral security for his individual indebtedness. Immediately upon its organization the Mercantile Company engaged in the wholesale liquor business at the place formerly occupied by Clarke, and continued to transact such business until January 10, 1895, and in the meantime became indebted to the firm of Paris, Allen & Co., for liquors purchased, in the sum of $3,250, and to the other complainants as well, the total indebtedness aggregating about $20,000. The aforesaid indebtedness was contracted with the full knowledge of the National Bank of Commerce in Denver, hereafter termed the 'Bank,' which was acquainted with the purchases that were from time to time made by the Mercantile Company. Upon its organization the Mercantile Company guarantied and indorsed the individual obligations of said Clarke to the bank; doing so, as the bill alleged, without consideration, and for the purpose of creating a fictitious indebtedness from the Mercantile Company to the bank. On or about January 10, 1895, the Mercantile Company sold and transferred its property and assets to another corporation, called the 'Colorado Mercantile Company,' for the sum of $50,000, the whole of which sum, when received, was paid to the defendant bank. The complainants below further charged, on information and belief, that the Mercantile Company was organized for the purpose of enabling Clarke to avoid the payment of his individual debts, amounting at the time to $50,000; that the sale by the Mercantile Company to the Colorado Mercantile Company, in January, 1895, was made for the sole purpose of enabling the vendor to avoid the payment of its just debts, particularly the several debts due to the complainants, and for the purpose of hindering and delaying its creditors in the collection of their debts, and to secure the payment of the indebtedness due from Clarke individually to the bank; and that by the sale made by Clarke to the Clarke Mercantile Company, and by the assignment of Clarke's 1,998 shares of stock to the defendant bank, as collateral security, the bank became the sole owner of the property of the Mercantile Company, and conducted the wholesale liquor business in the name of the latter company, for its sole use and benefit, from April, 1893, until the sale in January, 1895, to the Colorado Mercantile Company. The complainants also charged that during the last-mentioned period the bank, acting in the name of the Clarke Mercantile Company, published to the commercial world that the stock of said company had been fully paid up by the sale and transfer of Clarke's stock of goods to said company; that the value of the property and assets of said company exceeded $115,000; that its debts did not exceed $10,000; that the foregoing statements were made for the purpose of deceiving persons who had dealings with the Mercantile Company, and to induce such persons to sell goods to said company; that thereby the complainants were in fact induced to sell goods to the Mercantile Company, shortly prior to the sale of its business to the Colorado Mercantile Company, which goods were on hand at the time of said sale; and that the proceeds therefor, on the occasion of such sale, were paid to and received by the defendant bank, and were still held by it. They further charged that the Mercantile Company was at no time indebted to the bank in a sum exceeding $10,000. It was finally charged that the business aforesaid was conducted in the manner aforesaid,-- that is to say, by the bank in the name of the Clarke Mercantile Company,-- 'for the purpose of covering and concealing a secret trust in favor of the said respondent bank, and for the purpose of hindering, delaying, and defrauding the creditors of said respondent company, and particularly your orators, in the collection of their just claims and demands against the said respondent company.'

The bank, by its answer, denied, in substance, that the Mercantile Company had ever been its agent for the transaction of any business, or that it had ever transacted any business in the name of that company, or that it had ever made any statements to the commercial world such as were imputed to it in the bill of complaint, to the effect that the stock of the Mercantile Company was fully paid up, or concerning the value of its property and assets. It also denied in detail all other allegations contained in the bill which tended to show that it had become a party to any scheme to wrong or defraud the complainants or either of them. The case comes to this court on appeal from a decree in favor of the complainants below, which adjudged that the defendant bank should pay to the respective complainants the amount of their several demands against the Clarke Mercantile Company, all of which had been reduced to judgment, together with interest thereon at the rate of 8 per cent. per annum from and after November 2, 1895.

A. B. Seaman, for appellant.

Lucius M. Cuthbert (Henry T. Rogers and Daniel B. Ellis, on the brief), for appellees.

Before SANBORN and THAYER, Circuit Judges, and SHIRAS, District Judge.

THAYER Circuit Judge, after stating the case as above, .

It is claimed in behalf of the appellees, who were the complainants below, that the Clarke Mercantile Company indorsed the individual notes of A. K. Clarke, which were at the time held and owned by the appellant, the National Bank of Commerce in Denver, without receiving any consideration therefor, and that the indorsements in question were for that reason ultra vires and void. On the assumption that the indorsements were without consideration, it seems to be further contended that when the Mercantile Company discharged its liability to the bank on account of such indorsements by paying the notes, it acted wrongfully and in fraud of the rights of the appellees, and that the money so paid on account of the indorsements can be recovered by them from the bank, notwithstanding the admitted fact that none of the debts now due to the appellees were contracted by the Mercantile Company until more than a year after the indorsements were executed. We think it sufficient to say, concerning this contention of the appellees, that the proof does not support the charge that the indorsements were executed without consideration. The trial court was of the same opinion, and we fully concur in its views on that point. The record discloses that, at the first meeting of the directors of the Mercantile Company, Clarke proposed to sell and convey to said company his entire stock in trade, consisting of liquors, cigars, fixtures, and all other property, provided the company would issue to him its entire capital stock as full paid and nonassessable, and provided, further, that the company would indorse the notes of said Clarke to the National Bank of Commerce in Denver, in the sum of $77,500, in consideration of the transaction. The proposition which was made by Clarke obligated him to further secure his notes to the bank by hypothecating a sufficient amount of the capital stock of the Mercantile Company, when the same was issued to him, but it was expressly stated in his proposition to the company that the indorsement of his notes to the bank should form a part of the consideration for the proposed transfer of his stock in trade to the Mercantile Company. This proposition on the part of Clarke was accepted; his stock in trade was conveyed to the Mercantile Company; its total capital stock was issued to Clarke, or to such persons as were by him designated to receive it; and two notes of Clarke, one for $50,000 and one for $27,500, which were then held by the bank, were forthwith indorsed by the Mercantile Company. Moreover, we find no reason to doubt that the bank at that time held, as collateral...