In re Crystal Spring Bottling Co.
| Decision Date | 13 October 1899 |
| Citation | 96 F. 945 |
| Parties | In re CRYSTAL SPRING BOTTLING CO. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Vermont |
Henry C. Ide and Harry Blodgett, for trustee in bankruptcy.
Clarke C. Fitts, for stockholders of bankrupt corporation.
The capital stock of this corporation, organized under the laws of the state, was $50,000, divided into 2,000 shares of $25 each, on which $10 per share, amounting to $20,000, was paid in, and the balance of $15 per share, amounting to $30,000 remains unpaid. The trustee in bankruptcy represents that after realizing all he can from the assets, a deficiency remains of about $28,000 for the payment of the debts proved and asks to call in the balance unpaid on the stock for that purpose. That the corporate stock subscriptions are primary fund for the payment of the corporate debts is well settled and not disputed, but a call is necessary before unpaid subscriptions can be collected. The corporation in bankruptcy cannot act by its officers in making a call, and it can be done only by the trustee under direction of the court. That this is the proper mode is well shown by Scovill v. Thayer, 105 U.S. 143, where this course was taken and approved. Of course, these unpaid subscriptions are available only for, and to the extent of, a deficiency of other assets of the corporation for the payment of its debts. Beyond that would be collecting these unpaid subscriptions for the stockholders which have not been called for in their behalf, and is not within the scope of these bankruptcy proceedings. The laws of the state provide that no debts of such a corporation shall be contracted in excess of two-thirds of the capital stock actually paid in, and that a director assenting thereto shall be personally liable for the excess; and that, if the directors declare and pay a dividend while the corporation is insolvent, or by which it became insolvent, knowing its condition, those assenting thereto shall be liable in an action on the statute for debts due from the corporation at the time. V.S. Secs. 3723, 3724.
Some of the directors of this corporation are alleged by shareholders who have appeared to have become liable for some of these debts by assenting to them in excess of two-thirds of the capital paid in, and for some of them by declaring and paying dividends during insolvency; and these liabilities are set up as securities which should be reckoned in reduction of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lavell v. Bullock
...and he is the only party that can bring an action or proceeding thereon." Sanger v. Upton, 91 U.S. 56, 23 L.Ed. 220; Re Crystal Spring Bottling Co. (D. C.) 96 F. 945; v. Nickerson, 99 Ill. 284. "It is only through the instrumentality of the trustee, when the corporation has been adjudged a ......
-
Stodd v. Goldberger
...estate in bankruptcy. (E. g., Seegmiller v. Day, CA 7, 249 F. 177, 180-181; In re Beachy & Co., CA 8, 170 F. 825, 828; In re Crystal Spring Bottling Co., 96 F. 945, 946; Fitzgerald v. Marshall, D.C.Colo., 161 F.Supp. 470, Morris v. Sampsel (Wis.1937), 224 Wis. 560, 272 N.W. 53, 56-57; see a......
-
Falco v. Kaupisch Creamery Co.
...and he is the only party that can bring an action or proceeding thereon. Sanger v. Upton, 91 U.S. 56, 23 L.Ed. 220; In re Crystal Spring Bottling Co. (D.C.) 96 F. 945; Lane v. Nickerson, 99 Ill. 284. And it also that any fraudulent act of the corporation itself, intended to deprive the cred......
-
Kelley v. Aarons
...very thing which is by good laws forbidden.' Complainant, in support of the claim that this court has jurisdiction, cites In re Crystal Springs Co. (D.C.) 96 F. 945; Skillin v. Magnus (D.C.) 162 F. 689; In Baudouine, supra; Murphy v. Hoffman Co., 211 U.S. 562, 29 Sup.Ct. 154, 53 L.Ed. 327; ......