Nugent v. Riemore Nugent Collins
| Decision Date | 20 October 1980 |
| Docket Number | No. 79-1945,79-1945 |
| Citation | 89 Ill.App.3d 874,45 Ill.Dec. 244,412 N.E.2d 595 |
| Parties | , 45 Ill.Dec. 244 Beverly NUGENT, as Trustee under John A. Nugent Trust, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. RIEMORE NUGENT COLLINS, Individually and as Trustee under Riemore Nugent Trust, Midwest Machinery Movers, an Illinois Corporation, and Mechanical Wallmaster, Inc., an Illinois Corporation, Defendants-Appellants. |
| Court | United States Appellate Court of Illinois |
Bilandic, Neistein, Richman, Hauslinger & Young, Ltd., Chicago (Harry A. Young, Jr., Ronald G. Silbert, Alan Rosen and Gayle F. Haglund, Chicago, of counsel), for defendants-appellants.
Schumacher, Jones, Vallely, Kelly & Olson, Chicago (H. Barringer Pusch and Richard A. Marsh, Chicago, of counsel), for plaintiff-appellee.
This litigation involves the capital stock of two Illinois corporations: Midwest Machinery Movers (Midwest) and Mechanical Wallmaster, Inc. (Mechanical). The stock at issue consists of 15 shares of Mechanical and 100 shares of Midwest. It is undisputed certificates reflecting these shares were issued to "John A. Nugent Trust, John A. Nugent, Trustee." John A. Nugent died on January 11, 1979. Beverly Nugent (plaintiff) is his surviving spouse and executor of his estate.
The litigation here involved was commenced on April 25, 1979, when plaintiff filed suit against Midwest, Mechanical and Riemore Nugent Collins (defendants). After trial, a judgment order was entered finding the John A. Nugent Trust is the owner of the shares in question and plaintiff is the lawful successor trustee of said trust. The court directed that Midwest and Mechanical be required to hold shareholders meetings; and that one-half of the stock of Midwest and Mechanical be reissued to plaintiff as successor trustee. This appeal by defendant Collins, Midwest and Mechanical followed.
In this court the defendants contend plaintiff did not have a clear legal right to the issuance of a writ of mandamus because she was not a shareholder of record when she commenced the action; plaintiff was obliged to establish her right to become a shareholder before being entitled to the writ; plaintiff failed to prove annual meetings of the shareholders were due to be held when she filed her suit; plaintiff did not establish a clear legal right to issuance of half of the corporate stock to her as successor trustee of the John Nugent Trust; and the trial court erred in preventing defendants from raising affirmative defenses.
The size of the record and the length of the briefs before us make the formulation of a correct factual statement a difficult task. In our opinion, much of the evidence is extraneous. However, the record does show the following facts. The John A. Nugent Trust agreement was dated February 19, 1959. The trust was the owner of record of 100 shares of Midwest and 15 shares of Mechanical. There is also in existence a Riemore Nugent Trust created by a trust agreement dated February 19, 1959. The trustee thereof was formerly Riemore E. Rosauer. The present duly acting trustee thereof is Riemore Nugent Collins, defendant. The deceased John A. Nugent and defendant are half brother and sister.
Testimony was given by an auditor who was familiar with the affairs of both corporations and by one of the attorneys for plaintiff who had examined all of the corporate records involved. The United States Corporation Income Tax Returns filed by these corporations for 1974 to 1977 inclusive indicate that each of the trusts is the owner of one-half of the outstanding corporate stock. The attorney's testimony traced the corporate history of both corporations. As regards Midwest, the corporation is a result of several mergers. However, it appears from the record before us that the total outstanding shares of stock in Midwest are 200 which are equally divided as regards registered ownership between the John A. Nugent Trust and the Riemore Nugent Trust.
Prior to the death of John A. Nugent he was trustee of the trust, and he was the president and a director of both corporations. On January 12, 1979, defendant Collins, acting as the sole director, elected herself acting president and also elected a vice president and secretary for both corporations.
Plaintiff offered in evidence an executed copy of the John A. Nugent Trust. This document provides plaintiff is designated as first successor trustee in event of the death of the original trustee. During the pendency of this appeal, plaintiff located an original executed copy of the agreement. Plaintiff made a motion in this court to supplement the voluminous record by addition of this executed original. This court being satisfied by examination of both documents that the executed carbon copy received in evidence is in fact a true and correct copy, we have denied the motion as unnecessary. It also appears that on March 20, 1979, plaintiff accepted her designation as successor trustee. On or about March 6, 1979, plaintiff sent similar notices to the shareholders of both corporations purporting to call a special meeting of shareholders. Plaintiff also sent notices on March 27, 1979, calling an annual meeting of shareholders. The complaint for mandamus prays for a direction that both corporations hold annual meetings of shareholders. Additional facts will be discussed as required.
Defendants' first four contentions deal with the alleged failure of plaintiff to prove her legal right to a writ of mandamus. "Mandamus is an extraordinary remedy and will not be awarded unless a clear right to the writ is shown." Kohl Outdoor Advertising, Inc. v. Department of Transportation (1979), 72 Ill.App.3d 413, 415, 28 Ill.Dec. 591, 390 N.E.2d 950.
Defendants first argue plaintiff had no clear right to mandamus because plaintiff did not attempt to re-register the shares in her name upon the death of John A. Nugent and therefore, she was not the shareholder of record. Defendants depend upon section 30 of the Illinois Business Corporation Act which provides, in part (Ill.Rev.Stat. 1979, ch. 32, par. 157.30):
In our opinion, despite the fact the stock of both corporations was actually in John A. Nugent's name and was not re-registered in plaintiff's name at the time this suit was commenced, plaintiff, as successor trustee, had clear legal right to vote the stock. While the books of the corporation do not show a change of ownership of the stock, the right to vote the stock and all other rights incident to ownership thereof were transferred by operation of law to plaintiff, as the successor trustee, upon the death of John A. Nugent. (See Bogert, Trusts and Trustees, sec. 532 (Rev. 2d ed. 1978) citing Reichert v. Missouri & Illinois Coal Co. (1908), 231 Ill. 238, 83 N.E. 166.) The physical act of re-registering the stock would have been purely ministerial since it would be "absolute, certain and imperative, involving merely the execution of a set task * * *." Peabody v. Sanitary District of Chicago (1928), 330 Ill. 250, 257, 161 N.E. 519.
In addition, tender of the stock certificate by plaintiff to the corporation for transfer would have been a useless act. John A. Nugent's death left both corporations without a president to approve the transfer or sign new certificates. Section 34 of the Business Corporation Act (Ill.Rev.Stat. 1979, ch. 32, par. 157.34) provides the number of directors may not be less than the number of shareholders. Therefore, defendant Collins did not have authority as "sole director" to appoint new officers. It follows any attempt of plaintiff to re-register the shares would have been futile.
Defendants next argue plaintiff did not prove: first, that she was the successor trustee of the John A. Nugent Trust; and, second, that the John A. Nugent Trust owned 50 percent of the outstanding shares of the corporations. As above pointed out, the trust agreement clearly designates plaintiff the successor trustee. Also the ownership of the stock of Midwest and Mechanical appears beyond reasonable doubt. We reject this contention of defendants.
Defendants contend no annual meetings of the corporations were due to be held when plaintiff made her demand or when she filed suit. Defendants claim there had been a meeting at a hospital in Minnesota sometime in November 1978 so that the next annual meetings were not due to be scheduled before September 25, 1979, for Midwest and October 21, 1979, for Mechanical.
The corporate records produced by defendants do not reveal minutes of any annual meetings subsequent to August 31, 1976. Plaintiff, who had previously been a director of both corporations, testified the last meeting of either corporation was "about two years ago." She further stated defendant Collins did visit John A. Nugent in the hospital in November 1978 and plaintiff was present at the time but "(t)here was no meeting at all." There was no evidence presented...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Lincoln Manor v. Dept. of Public Health
-
Telegraph Sav. & Loan Ass'n of Chicago v. Schilling
...may disregard labels, and may grant relief to which a plaintiff is entitled upon the evidence.' " (Nugent v. Collins (1980), 89 Ill.App.3d 874, 879, 45 Ill.Dec. 244, 412 N.E.2d 595.) It would seem that the same discretion would be allowed to a reviewing court when reversing and remanding a ......
- Foley v. Civil Service Commission
-
In re Wallace A. Erickson & Co.
...and failure to perform it does not prevent at least equitable ownership from being transferred. Nugent v. Collins, 89 Ill.App.3d 874, 45 Ill.Dec. 244, 412 N.E.2d 595, 598 (1980). In the present case, similarly to the situation in Nugent, the stock was properly voted by the trustees of the G......