In re Heffron Co.

Decision Date08 September 1914
Docket Number5408.
PartiesIn re HEFFRON CO.
CourtU.S. District Court — Northern District of New York

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Costello Burden, Cooney & Walters, of Syracuse, N.Y., for trustee.

Tracy Chapman & Tracy, of Syracuse, N.Y., for Daniel F. Tolman, mortgagee.

Jas. J. Barrett, of Syracuse, N.Y., for State of New York.

C. G. Baldwin, of Syracuse, N.Y., for United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. and others.

Herbert Robinson, of Syracuse, N.Y., for Heffron Co.

Frank Hopkins, of Syracuse, N.Y., for City of Syracuse.

Benj. Stolz, of Syracuse, N.Y., for general creditors.

RAY District Judge (after stating the facts as above).

The special master has found certain facts, viz.:

'First. The Heffron Company is a foreign corporation, incorporated under the laws of the state of Maine, December 27, 1907. It immediately began doing business within the state of New York and continued so to do until the filing of the petition in bankruptcy. During all of such time, its business has been carried on within the state of New York. On December 8, 1913, a petition in bankruptcy, involuntary in form, was presented to the court, on which date Frank B. Hodges was appointed receiver, and Mr. Hodges was appointed trustee of the bankrupt on the 14th day of April, 1914. The bankrupt was insolvent for at least four months immediately prior to the filing of the petition in bankruptcy.
'Second. On June 26, 1913, and for some time prior thereto, the Heffron Company was the owner of certain real estate in the city of Syracuse, described as follows. * * *
'On the last-mentioned date, this property was incumbered by two mortgages; one amounting to $16,400, held by the Syracuse Savings Bank, and another amounting to $20,000, held by Clifford E. Lipe. On said date, it executed and delivered to Daniel H. Tolman its bond, secured by a mortgage covering the property above described in the sum of $50,000, which mortgage bore interest at the rate of 6 per cent. and which was recorded in the Onondaga county clerk's office June 28, 1913, in Book 462 of Mortgages, at page 406. This mortgage was executed pursuant to a resolution of the board of directors, but no consent to the execution of such mortgage was ever given by the stockholders. No consent of the stockholders had been given to the execution of the mortgage to Clifford E. Lipe above referred to. The Heffron Company had never procured from the Secretary of State the certificate prescribed by section 15 of the General Corporation Law of the state of New York, to the effect that it had complied with the requirements of law authorizing it to do business within this state.
'Third. At or prior to the execution of the bond and mortgage to Daniel H. Tolman and as a part of the same transaction, the Heffron Company and Daniel H. Tolman entered into an agreement in writing (Exhibit 10) which, in effect, secured to Tolman, in addition to the interest specified in the bond and mortgage, a commission of 1 1/2 per cent. on the gross monthly sales of the Heffron Company, and subsequently there was paid to Tolman by the Heffron Company $424.67 to apply upon such commissions.
'Fourth. From the proceeds of the loan of $50,000 received from Daniel H. Tolman, the Heffron Company paid the bonds and mortgages held by the Syracuse Savings Bank and Clifford E. Lipe, respectively. It also paid the claims of certain creditors, aggregating $1,995, attorney and recording fees of $255, and the balance was retained by it. Interest was paid on the mortgage down to August 30, 1913.
'Fifth. The Heffron Company never paid to the state treasurer of the state of New York the license tax or fee imposed on foreign corporations by section 181 of the Tax Law (Consol. Laws, N.Y. c. 60), nor did it ever pay the annual franchise tax imposed by section 182 of the Tax Law of the state of New York.
'Sixth. On April 15, 1913, it filed with the state comptroller of the state of New York, a report (Exhibit 1) on a blank form prepared by the comptroller and executed by its secretary and treasurer, showing, among other things, the date and place of its corporation, the date when it began business in the state of New York, the amount of its capital stock, the dividends paid since is incorporation, the nature of its business and the percentage of its capital stock employed in the state of New York during the year ending October 31, 1912, in manufacturing and in the sale of the product of such manufacture. This report shows the company to have been a manufacturing corporation, that its total capital stock was $1,000,000, and that the percentage of its capital, used in this state during the year mentioned in manufacturing, to have been 60 per cent. Upon this report, and without any other evidence or outside information, the comptroller on the 18th day of April, 1913, fixed a license tax under section 181 of the Tax Law of $1,250, and a franchise tax under section 182 of the Tax Law for the years 1908 to 1912, inclusive, which with accrued penalties now amounts to $2,196.34. In arriving at the tax imposed by section 182 of the Tax Law, the comptroller ignored the claim of the Heffron Company, as shown by the report filed, tending to show that it was a manufacturing corporation, as well as its claim that 60 per cent. of its capital was employed in the state of New York during the year 1912 in manufacturing, and the amount of the tax imposed under section 182 was the tax properly imposed on a nonmanufacturing corporation without any exemption to which it was entitled under section 183 of the Tax Law if it were a manufacturing corporation employing, at least, 40 per cent. of its capital stock in manufacturing in this state.
'Seventh. On the 20th day of May, 1913, there was docketed in the Onondaga county clerk's office a judgment against the Heffron Company and in favor of David Chezensky and Louis Alpern in the sum of $2,146.20. Thereafter the Heffron Company took an appeal from said judgment to the Appellate Division, First Department, and an undertaking on appeal in the sum of $2,500 was executed by the United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company. The United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company was indemnified by the personal bond of Messrs. Stansfield and Loop, officers of the Heffron Company. On the 14th day of June, 1913, the attorney for the judgment creditors Chezensky and Alpern, and the attorney for the Heffron Company entered into a written stipulation to the effect that the lien of said judgment upon any real estate or property of the Heffron Company should be suspended during the appeal, and that an order to this effect might be entered in the clerk's office of Onondaga county. Pursuant to this stipulation and on application of counsel for the Heffron Company, the Special Term of the Supreme Court did, on the 23d day of June, 1913, grant an order exempting the real property of the Heffron Company from the lien of said judgment as against judgment creditors, purchasers, and mortgagees in good faith, and directing the clerk of Onondaga county to note on the docket of said judgment that the lien thereof was suspended on appeal pursuant to the terms of said order. This order was entered in the clerk's office of Onondaga county on June 23, 1913, and the clerk complied with the terms of its direction to him. The stipulation entered into between the attorneys for the respective parties to the action, the granting of the order of the Special Term, and the action of the clerk in noting on his docket the suspension of the lien, were all without notice to the United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company, although section 1256 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides that such an order may be made only upon notice to the attorney for the respondent and to the sureties in the undertaking. The appeal to the Appellate Division terminated on the 27th day of December, 1913, by an affirmance of the judgment. 144 N.Y.Supp. 1103. An appeal was thereafter taken by the Heffron Company to the Court of Appeals, and on the 29th day of December, 1913, the United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company executed an undertaking on appeal to the Court of Appeals. The appeal to the Court of Appeals was dismissed on the 4th day of June. 1914. The order of the Special Term granted June 23, 1913, has never been vacated, nor has the lien of the judgment as suspended by said order ever been restored by an order of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.

'Eighth. The city of Syracuse on the 15th day of September, 1913, levied an assessment against the Heffron Company for the year 1913, which, together with fees and penalties, now amounts to the sum of $1,119.52, no part of which has been paid.

'Ninth. The county of Onondaga on the 15th day of December, 1913, levied an assessment against the Heffron Company for the year 1913, which, together with fees and penalties, now amounts to the sum of $426.57, no part of which has been paid.'

These findings of fact cannot be disturbed, as they are accurate and fully supported by the evidence. As to certain judgments, the special master finds that one has been paid, that another has been paid, except $70, and that the others were obtained within four months of the filing of the petition and are not liens. He then finds as conclusions of law:

'First. That the mortgage of Daniel H. Tolman described in the second finding of fact is valid and is a lien upon the property described therein for $50,000 and interest from August 30, 1913.
'Second. That the contract of June 19, 1913 (Exhibit 10) is so related to the said mortgage and the bond accompanying the same that interest in excess of 6 per cent. per annum was thereby taken upon the loan secured by the mortgage.
'Third. That by reason of the provisions of section
...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • In re Raflowitz, 19893.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Connecticut
    • 21 Febrero 1941
    ...evidence that "the tax commissioner might have based his valuation on other facts than those contained in the" false return. In re Heffron Co., D.C., 216 F. 642, is to the same effect. In Arkansas Corp. Comm. v. Thompson, 8 Cir., 116 F.2d 179 (certiorari pending), it was held that a court h......
  • Massachusetts Bonding & Insurance Company v. Home Life & Accident Company
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • 31 Mayo 1915
  • Dickinson v. Riley
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit
    • 19 Noviembre 1936
    ...In re Simcox, Inc., 243 F. 479 (D.C.); In re Sheinman, 14 F.(2d) 823, 824 (D.C.); In re Williams Oil Corp., 265 F. 401 (D.C.); In re Heffron Co., 216 F. 642 (D.C.); In re Geo. F. Redmond & Co., Inc., 17 F.(2d) 128 On the other view, that is, that section 64a of the Bankruptcy Act (as amende......
  • Lyman County v. Scott
    • United States
    • North Dakota Supreme Court
    • 14 Octubre 1938
    ...51 L. ed. 284, 27 S.Ct. 137, 17 Am. Bankr. Rep. 63; Re E.C. Fisher Corp. (D.C.) 229 F. 316, 36 Am. Bankr. Rep. 509; Re Heffron Co. (D.C.) 216 F. 642, 33 Am. Bankr. Rep. 443; W.P. Williams Oil Corp. (D.C.) 265 F. 401, 45 Am. Bankr. Rep. 278; Re Sheinman (D.C.) 14 F.2d 323, 8 Am. Bankr. Rep. ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT