D'Oench v. Gillioz
Decision Date | 07 May 1940 |
Docket Number | 36336 |
Parties | William D'Oench, Appellant, v. M. E. Gillioz et al |
Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from Barry Circuit Court; Hon. Emory E. Smith Judge.
Affirmed.
John W. Giesecke, Farrington & Curtis and Claude E Curtis for appellant.
The contract and agreement pleaded in plaintiff's amended bill in equity created an express trust, and plaintiff's amended bill in equity states a cause of action against defendants and states and pleads sufficient facts upon which the court could render the judgment and decree prayed for. Starks v. Lincoln, 291 S.W. 132, 316 Mo. 483; Mendenhall v. Pearce, 20 S.W.2d 670, 323 Mo. 964; Darling v. Buddy, 1 S.W.2d 163, 318 Mo. 784; Boden v. Johnson, 47 S.W.2d 155, 226 Mo.App. 787; Van Studdiford v. Randolph, 49 S.W.2d 250; Musgrove v. Macon County Bank, 174 S.W. 171, 187 Mo.App. 483; Hillman v. Allen, 47 S.W. 509, 145 Mo 638; Constant v. Simon, 259 S.W. 424, 303 Mo. 203; Heil v. Heil, 84 S.W. 45, 184 Mo. 665; Flagg v. Walker, 28 L.Ed. 1072, 5 S.Ct. 697; Sturdivant Bank v. Houck, 47 S.W.2d 135, 113 U.S. 659; 65 C. J., sec. 62, pp. 280-281-282.
James E. Sater for respondents.
It is conceded by appellant that if the contract set out in his petition does not create an express trust, then the trial court was correct in sustaining the demurrer to the petition. The Central State Bank by the contract sold, transferred and delivered all of its assets to the Monett State Bank and Trust Company, upon the consideration of the assumption of the liabilities of the Central State Bank, except the capital stock liability, and upon a future contingency additional payment might be made. The title to all the property passed to the Monett State Bank and Trust Company, and the future contingency did not create a trust, but, under the law, prevented a trust. It is well settled in this State that in an express trust the title of the trust estate vests at the time of the execution of the instrument and not upon the happening of some contingency in the future. Sell v. West, 125 Mo. 621; Trautz v. Lemp, 46 S.W.2d 139, 329 Mo. 580; Van Studdiford v. Randolph, 49 S.W.2d 250; Sturdivant Bank v. Houck, 47 S.W.2d 135; Waisco v. Oshkosh Savs. & Trust Co., 196 N.W. 829; Dorrah v. Pemiscot County Bank, 256 S.W. 560; Vogelar v. Punch, 205 Mo. 558.
Hyde, C. Bradley and Dalton, CC., concur.
This is an action in equity for the declaration of an express trust in certain real and personal property, formerly owned by a banking corporation of which plaintiff was a stockholder, an accounting, removal of officers and directors of the bank, appointment of a receiver, and orders of distribution to plaintiff and other stockholders as alleged beneficiaries. The court sustained defendants' general demurrer to the petition and entered judgment of dismissal, from which plaintiff has appealed.
Plaintiff alleged that he was the owner of 65 shares of the capital stock (total shares were 500) of the Central State Bank of Monett, and stated that this bank's transaction with defendants, upon which plaintiff's claim is based, was as follows:
Plaintiff further alleged that "the defendants have paid to the Central State Bank of Monett, Missouri, a dividend (per cent not stated) but have not turned over to said Central State Bank the secondary assets aforesaid nor any profits therefrom that remained on February 1, 1932, but have sold and disposed of part of the profits as well as the...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Campbell v. Webb
... ... & S. Ry. Co., 135 Mo. 173, 36 S.W. 602; ... Wayne Tank & Pump Co. v. Quick-Serv. Laundry Co., ... 285 S.W. 750; D'Oench v. Gillioz, 346 Mo. 179, ... 139 S.W.2d 921; 49 C.J. 125. (4) The rule that restrictions ... and limitations are strictly construed against the grantor is ... ...
-
Bostian v. Milens
... ... Finegan, 233 Iowa 448, 7 N.W.2d 729, l. c. 729, 733, ... 732; McGarry v. Mathis, 226 Iowa 37, 282 N.W. 786, ... 790; D'Oench v. Gillioz, 346 Mo. 179, 139 S.W.2d ... 921, l. c. 923; (b) The petition fails to state a cause of ... action entitling plaintiff to any relief under the ... ...
-
Bagby v. Missouri-Kansas-Texas R. Co.
... ... general statements of fact which are contradicted by the ... specific statements. D'Oench v. Gillioz, 346 Mo ... 179, 139 S.W.2d 921; Farm & Home Savs. & L. Assn. v ... Armstrong, 337 Mo. 349, 85 S.W.2d 461. (4) Where it is ... not contended ... ...
- Luettecke v. City of St. Louis