Johnson v. Beneficial Loan Soc.
Decision Date | 03 August 1940 |
Docket Number | No. 54 Civil.,54 Civil. |
Citation | 34 F. Supp. 392 |
Parties | JOHNSON et al. v. BENEFICIAL LOAN SOC. et al. |
Court | U.S. District Court — District of Delaware |
Hastings, Stockly & Layton, of Wilmington, Del., for plaintiffs.
Richards, Layton & Finger, of Wilmington, Del., for defendant Beneficial Loan Soc.
Beneficial Loan Society, one of the defendants, moves to dismiss the action because the amount in controversy does not exceed $3,000, exclusive of interest and costs.
Plaintiffs, Julia A. Johnson and Allan Wilbur Johnson, are citizens of New York. Plaintiff, Florence Johnson Wadleigh, is a citizen of Massachusetts. Beneficial Loan Society is a corporation of Delaware. The individual defendants are residents of Philadelphia, New Jersey, Maryland or California, who have never been served with process and may be disregarded in the consideration of this motion.
The complaint alleges inter alia:
(10) That the complainants are now and have been since April 6, 1923, the owners and holders as joint tenants with the right of survivorship and not as tenants in common of two (2) $1,000 certificates of indebtedness, dated January 1, 1914, and maturing twenty-five (25) years after date, bearing interest at the rate of six (6%) percent per annum, payable quarterly, issued by defendant.
(12) That the said certificates of indebtedness held by the complainants herein are a part of an issue of $8,000,000 in principal amount of certificates of indebtedness or bonds, issued by defendant on or about January 1, 1914, and from time to time thereafter of like tenor and effect, except as to the respective denominations thereof.
(13) That defendant issued, with each of said bonds, a profit sharing certificate, in words and figures as follows:
(14) That complainants became the owners on or about April 6, 1923, and have been the owners ever since, of two (2) profit sharing Certificates issued as aforesaid.
(15) That from the time of the issue of the said bonds until 1929, defendant was engaged in operating small loan offices throughout the various states where the law permitted the existence and operation of small loan offices and they charged interest rates from thirty-six percent (36%) to forty-two percent (42%) per annum. The business of defendant increased yearly from 1914 to 1929. Every year defendant opened offices in new territories. At the end of 1928 defendant operated some eighty odd small loan offices and received a net return from the operation of the said small loan offices of from twenty-eight percent (28%) to thirty percent (30%) on its capital of twelve million ($12,000,000) dollars. The net profits received by the defendant from the small loan business was approximately three million four hundred eighty thousand ($3,480,000) dollars per annum.
(16) Said bonds of defendant were not secured by any mortgage but were a direct obligation of defendant and chargeable against its entire assets. Said profit sharing certificates did not contain a guarantee of profits but entitled the owner and holder thereof to one-third (1/3) of the profits of defendant but not in excess of eight (8%) per cent in any one year....
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Campbell v. Webb
... ... , Amos Harra, Elizabeth Latimer, Raymond Harra, Frances Harra, Burl Johnson, Frank L. Harra, Nettie Harra, Augusta Harra Lawrence v. Lula Webb, ... Associated Milk Dealers, ... 42 F.Supp. 584; Johnson v. Beneficial Loan Co., 34 ... F.Supp. 392; Oppenheimer v. Young, 3 Fed. Rules Dec ... ...
-
Giesecke v. Denver Tramway Corporation
...F.Supp. 554, 556; Knowles v. War Damage Corp., D.C.Cir., 171 F.2d 15; Koster v. Turchi, D.C.Pa., 79 F. Supp. 268; Johnson v. Beneficial Loan Soc., D.C.Del., 34 F.Supp. 392, 395; Long v. Dravo Corp., D.C.Pa., 6 F.R.D. 226, 227; see also 2 Moore's Federal Practice (1947 Cum.Supp.) p. 7 Cratty......
-
Harris v. Palm Springs Alpine Estates, Inc.
...Supp. 934, 935 (D.Mass.1962). The same may be said of Speed v. Transamerica Corp., 5 F.R.D. 56 (D.Del.1945), and Johnson v. Beneficial Loan Soc'y, 34 F. Supp. 392 (D.Del.1940). See generally Comment, 51 Calif.L.Rev. 939, 944-954 6 "Rule 23. Class Actions "(a) Representation. If persons cons......
-
Tompkins v. Stifel
...fell within statute of limitations and thus amount in controversy fell below the jurisdictional requirement); Johnson v. Beneficial Loan Soc., 34 F. Supp. 392, 395 (D. Del. 1940) (finding that plaintiffs' complaint did not meet the jurisdictional amount because unpaid profits claims were ou......