Fluker v. Emporia City Ry. Co.
Citation | 30 P. 18,48 Kan. 577 |
Parties | JOHN FLUKER et al. v. THE EMPORIA CITY RAILWAY COMPANY et al |
Decision Date | 07 May 1892 |
Court | United States State Supreme Court of Kansas |
Error from Lyon District Court.
THE opinion states the case.
Judgment affirmed.
C. N Sterry, and J. Jay Buck, for plaintiffs in error.
L. B Kellogg, for defendants in error.
OPINION
The plaintiffs in error, owning a minority interest in the Emporia City Railway Company, a corporation organized under the laws of this state, commenced this action in the Lyon county district court on the 12th day of October, 1889. The principal question in the case determined by the trial court, and the sole question here is, whether a receiver should be appointed. At the trial the court made the following special findings of fact:
"1. The Emporia City Railway Company is a corporation duly organized under the laws of the state of Kansas, and was incorporated about November 3, 1881. It capital stock is composed of 250 shares of $ 100 each. When this suit was commenced these shares were distributed and owned as follows, viz.:
By the plaintiff John Fluker
60 shares
By the plaintiff D. W. Holderman
16 shares
By the plaintiff John Holderman
8 shares
By the plaintiff Magdalene Holderman
8 shares
By the plaintiff Elizabeth Holderman
8 shares
By the plaintiff J. L. Patty
4 shares
By the plaintiff John H. Patty
4 shares
By the plaintiff D. W. Holderman, administrator, etc.
4 shares
By the plaintiff H. C. Cross, guardian, etc.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Pullis v. Pullis Brothers Iron Company
...... . Appeal. from St. Louis City Circuit Court. -- Hon. James E. Withrow,. Judge. . . . Reversed and ......
-
Taylor v. Decatur Mineral & Land Co.
...... stockholders. Cook, Stock, Stockh. & Corp. Law, Sec. 240;. City of Memphis v. Dean, 8 Wall. 73, 19 L.Ed. 326;. Rogers v. Railway Co., supra, and authorities ... the majority is not sufficient for the appointment of a. receiver of the corporation. ' Fluker v. Railway. Co., 48 Kan. 577, 30 P. 18; 2 Cook, Corp. §§ 740, 741. 'A court of equity will not ......
-
Smiley v. New River Co.
......201, 9 L.R.A. 527; Farwell v. Babcock, . 27 Tex. Civ. App. 162, 65 S.W. 513; Fluker v. Emporia. City R. Co., 48 Kan. 577, 580, 30 P. 18; Callaway v. Powhatan Imp. Co., 95 Md. ......
-
Inscho v. Mid-Continent Development Co.
...... . . . Angevine, Cubbison & Holt, of Kansas City, for appellant. . . James. L. Hogin, of Clay Center, and T. F. Railsback, of ... appoint a receiver at the instance of the minority.". Fluker v. City Ry. Co., 48 Kan. 577, syl. par. 2, 30. P. 18. . . "The. appointment of a ......