Dotson v. Hoggan
| Citation | 44 Utah 295,140 P. 128 |
| Decision Date | 02 April 1914 |
| Docket Number | 2566 |
| Court | Supreme Court of Utah |
| Parties | DOTSON v. HOGGAN |
APPEAL from District Court, Seventh District; Hon. M. L. Ritchie Presiding Judge.
Action by R. W. Dotson against James W. Hoggan.
Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant appeals.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
Willard Hansen for appellant.
Dilworth Woolly and Lewis Larsen for respondent.
This is an action by a creditor of the States Mining Company, a mining corporation of Utah, against one of the stockholders of said corporation. The plaintiff obtained judgment against the stockholder, and he appeals.
Counsel for the plaintiff, respondent here, in their brief, say "There is not much controversy between the parties to this action as to what the facts are." We concur in that statement. The difficulty in this case, however, does not arise with respect to the facts, but it arises with regard to the application of the law to the facts. The controlling facts, briefly stated, are as follows:
The appellant and a number of his neighbors, all of whom live at Manti, Sanpete County, Utah, were stockholders of the States Mining Company, which owned and operated a mine located in Beaver County, Utah. The respondent is a merchant of Minersville, Utah, and in furnishing supplies for the corporation aforesaid became one of its creditors. In September, 1907, appellant was installed as general manager of said mine. At that time the mining company was indebted to a number of creditors of whom respondent was one. It appears from the evidence that the stockholders from time to time, or from month to month, made voluntary contributions, by some called assessments, from the proceeds of which the current expenses arising from the operation of the mine were paid; the mine itself not yielding any returns whatever. On the 25th day of September, 1907, the appellant deposited in the bank to the credit of the company the sum of $ 500 of his own money all of which he used in paying company debts. On the 15th of October, 1907, appellant returned from Beaver County, where he had been carrying on the mining work at the mine, to Manti. At about that time, it seems, an informal meeting of a large number of the stockholders was held at Manti and the question of raising funds to pay off the debts of the company was discussed. Appellant then reported that the debts of the company amounted to about $ 2500, and that a one-half cent assessment, if paid in on the 500,000 shares of company stock outstanding, would produce that sum; that the amount of his assessment at that rate would amount to $ 1,000, which he was willing to contribute if the other stockholders would contribute in like proportion. This, it seems, was agreed to by all present at the meeting. Pursuant to this agreement, one stockholder was assessed $ 187.50, another $ 82.50, a third $ 82.50, a fourth $ 45.25, a fifth $ 45.25, a sixth $ 86.50, a seventh $ 94.50 and an eighth $ 90.50; all of whom paid their respective assessments to appellant and said money was by him used in paying the debts of the company. In addition to the foregoing, there were also a few additional amounts paid in by some stockholders residing in Beaver County. The appellant contributed $ 500 in addition to the $ 500 he had already advanced, and the whole contention arises with respect to whether he was legally required to pay $ 1000 in addition to the $ 500 advanced by him in September as aforesaid. The trial court found that he should pay $ 1000 in addition to the $ 500 he had paid and entered judgment against him in favor of respondent for the sum of $ 391.37, and for $ 51.15 costs. The reason the court did not enter judgment for the full $ 500 was because he allowed appellant credit on some payments he had made to some creditors of the company but refused to allow him credit for the full $ 500 paid by him in September, although the court found that all of that amount was paid to the creditors of the company by appellant. We have carefully considered all of the evidence, and we cannot see how the court's findings and judgment can be sustained. If they are sustained, it will result in requiring appellant to pay a three-quarter cent assessment on his shares of stock while all the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Seyberth v. American Commander Mining & Milling Co.
... ... 373; Brockway v. Gadsden Mineral Land Co., 102 Ala ... 620, 15 So. 431; Pike v. Bangor & C. S. L. R. Co., ... 68 Me. 445; Dotson v. Hoggan, 44 Utah 295, 140 P ... 128; Sullivan Co. Club v. Butler, 26 Misc. 306, 56 ... N.Y.S. 1; Liggett v. Glenn, 51 F. 381, 2 C. C. A ... ...
-
Andrews v. Chase
... ... the stock or so much thereof as may be necessary to pay the ... assessment. Dotson v. Hoggan , 44 Utah 295, ... 140 P. 128. In light of the allegations of the complaint that ... the persons to whom the stock was given assumed no ... ...
-
Weede v. Emma Copper Co.
...no application to the collection of assessments on fully paid stock. The latter assessments are governed by the law as laid down in Dotson v. Hoggan, supra. Nor the cases cited by counsel from the Supreme Court of California, namely, San Bernardino, etc., Co. v. Merrill, 108 Cal. 490, 41 P.......
- Bank of American Fork v. Smith