Haskell v. Worthington
Decision Date | 19 March 1888 |
Citation | 7 S.W. 481,94 Mo. 560 |
Parties | HASKELL v. WORTHINGTON. |
Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Defendant subscribed to the stock of a corporation, the name of which was given in the subscription paper. When the company organized the words "of St. Louis" were added. Held, no defense to an action on the subscription.
3. SAME.
It is no defense to an action on stock subscription by a company organized to carry on the business contemplated in the subscription paper, and engaged in that business only, that it might, under the act of incorporation, have carried on other business.
4. SAME.
It is no defense to an action on stock subscription that defendant was induced to sign by the false representation that certain of his neighbors and friends had agreed to take stock in the company, there having been ample opportunity to ascertain the truth of the assertion.
Appeal from St. Louis circuit court.
Action by Calvin Haskell, respondent, assignee of the Missouri Cotton-Seed Oil Company, of St. Louis, against Charles T. Worthington, appellant, to recover on stock subscription.
Hough, Overall & Judson, for appellant. J. P. & J. D. Johnson, for respondent.
This action was instituted by the plaintiff as assignee of the Missouri Cotton-Seed Oil Company, of St. Louis, to recover the sum of $2,500, the par value of 25 shares, which, it is alleged in the petition, the defendant subscribed to the capital stock of said company by the following written contract:
The defendant admitted that he signed the subscription paper, but denies that a company was ever, in pursuance thereof, organized under the laws of the state of Missouri; avers that the corporation pretended to have been organized was not the corporation contemplated by the subscribers to said paper, and that his signature thereto was obtained by fraud. To show that plaintiff's assignor was incorporated and organized under the laws of Missouri, and was the company contemplated by the subscription paper, and entitled to recover thereon, the following certificates of association and incorporation, and proceedings thereunder, were introduced in evidence:
The document was duly acknowledged and filed for record on the 23d of September, 1879.
On the 29th of September, 1879, Messrs. Kay, Tilden, Goodin, and Hart, a majority of those designated to constitute the first board of directors in the certificate, met, elected Kay president and Hart secretary pro tem., read the recorded certificate and certificate of incorporation, and declared the association perfected, and thereupon proceeded to adopt a series of by-laws, among others the following: After the adoption of the by-laws the directors proceeded to ballot for officers, and William V. Kay was elected president and treasurer. The election of secretary was postponed, and "on motion it was ordered that the call of the stock of this corporation be made as follows: 50 per cent., payable on the first day of October, 1879; 25 per cent., payable on the 15th day of October, 1879; 25 per cent. on the 1st day of November, 1879; and that the secretary pro tem. notify the subscribers to that effect." In October, 1879, the company leased premises, and commenced business with second-hand machinery, brought by Kay from Chicago, with which his capital stock and part of Tilden's was paid for. Some of the other subscribers paid for their stock, some did not. The company continued in business untill January, 1881, when it became insolvent, and made an assignment. Plaintiff is the assignee. There was no evidence tending to show that either Goodin or Hart were subscribers for stock or stockholders in the company except their participation in the proceedings recited: one as a signer to the certificate for incorporation, and both as directors of the company, and who, with Kay and Tilden, were the men, so far as the proceedings show, who alone organized the company, passed the by-laws, and made the call. Kay and Tilden were the promoters of the enterprise. The defendant, who was a planter, being in Mississippi, signed the...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Sherman v. Shaughnessy
...Henderson, 120 Mo. 367; Lewis v. Ins. Company, 61 Mo. 538; Hotel Co. v. Smith, 13 Mo.App. 7; Haskell v. Sells, 14 Mo.App. 91; Haskell v. Worthington, 94 Mo. 560; Hotel Co. v. Wright, 73 Mo.App. 240. (2) It was necessary to allege or prove a tender of the stock or demand for the money. Champ......
-
Hequembourg v. Edwards
...v. Fisher, 75 Mo. 498; Joy v. Manion, 28 Mo.App. 55; Boeppler v. Menown, 17 Mo.App. 447; Haskell v. Sells, 14 Mo.App. 91; Haskell v. Worthington, 94 Mo. 560. Actions may be maintained against directors jointly. Thomp. Corps., sec. 4098. (8) Having embarked as a corporation with less money i......
-
First Nat. Bank v. Rockefeller
...of the incorporation, and the assignee of an incorporation may maintain such a suit. Shockley v. Fisher, 75 Mo. 498; Haskell v. Worthington, 94 Mo. 560, 7 S. W. 481. But it is obvious that those cases proceeded on the assumption that there was in fact a de facto corporation, and the parties......
-
Society of Helpers of Holy Souls v. Ernest Law
...... to revocation at the suit of the State. [ St. Louis v. Shields, 62 Mo. l. c. 252; Haskell v. Worthington, 94 Mo. l. c. 560, 7 S.W. 481; Black v. Early, 208 Mo. l. c. 281, 106 S.W. 1014; Klix v. St. Stanislaus Parish, 137 Mo.App. l. ......