Rand v. Hubbell

Decision Date04 September 1874
Citation115 Mass. 461
CourtUnited States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
PartiesEdward S. Rand & another v. John H. Hubbell & others

[Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material]

Suffolk. Bill in equity by the administrators with the will annexed of Sarah Louise Hubbell, to obtain the instructions of the court as to whether certain shares of stock should be inventoried as part of the estate of said Sarah Louise, and whether said shares were income or capital. The case was reported by Ames, J., for the determination of the full court, in substance as follows:

Sarah Louise Hubbell died September 10, 1878. By her will, which was duly proved October 7, 1873, she disposed of her entire estate, real and personal.

Peter Hubbell, by his last will, which was proved February 14, 1871, gave to his wife, the said Sarah Louise, during her life, the use, income and improvement of all the rest and residue of the estate, real, personal and mixed, of which he should die seised or possessed or entitled to, remaining after payment of his debts and sundry legacies, with full power to sell and reinvest proceeds at her discretion; and on her decease, such rest and residue to his heirs at law of lineal descent; and appointed her executrix of his will. She was also required to pay an annuity of $ 3000 to the son of the testator, and legacies of $ 1000 each to nine nephews and nieces.

He died January 9, 1871, and was at the time of his death the owner of 1355 shares of the capital stock of the Bay State Brick Company, a corporation organized under the general laws of Massachusetts, the capital stock of which was, down to April 14, 1873, $ 500,000, divided into 5000 shares of $ 100 each. The certificates for said 1355 shares stood in the name of Peter Hubbell, until the transaction of May 23, hereinafter mentioned.

On April 14, said corporation at a legal meeting of its stockholders passed the following vote: "That it is expedient to increase the capital stock of the company to the amount of two hundred and fifty thousand dollars, so that the capital stock shall be seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars, instead of five hundred thousand dollars as now constituted, divided into shares of one hundred dollars each; and that each stockholder of record of this date be entitled to one share in the new stock so created for every two shares held in the old stock; that said capital be increased accordingly, and that the new stock be paid for and taken on or before the 15th day of May, a. d. 1873; and that the directors be authorized and directed to take the requisite steps to this end, and do whatever is required by law for this purpose; and that new certificates be issued according to law."

On April 14, the directors of said corporation passed the following votes: "That an extra and special dividend of fifty dollars a share be paid on or before May 15, 1873, to holders of the old stock as it stood April 14, 1873, the dividend to be applied by the stockholders in payment for the new stock created." "That in issuing stock under the recent vote of the stockholders the treasurer be authorized to recognize assignments of fractional parts of new shares among the stockholders; but he is not to issue new stock to other than the old stockholders without further action of the directors."

On the same day, the treasurer of said corporation issued to each stockholder therein the following notice: "By a vote of the stockholders the company has increased its capital stock to the extent of $ 250,000 more. Holders of shares of record April 14, 1873, are entitled to one share of the new stock for every two of the old, with a right to transfer fractional shares as between each other. An extra dividend has been ordered of fifty per cent. on the old stock, payable May 15, 1873, which is to be taken in payment of the new stock. Please call, take the stock and dividend, and pay for the same. Please bring your old certificate."

The treasurer of the corporation made out checks upon the Blackstone National Bank for the respective amounts of the dividends so ordered by the directors, and intrusted them to the clerk of the corporation, from whom each stockholder received the check for the amount of his dividend, and gave therefor a receipt upon the dividend book of the corporation in the form hereinafter set forth; and on receiving the check, he was told by the clerk to take it to the president of the corporation; and he accordingly took the check to the president in the adjoining room, and exchanged it for a certificate of the shares apportioned to the stock held by him, and gave a receipt for the shares. This was the course of proceeding adopted by the officers of the corporation, and this course was pursued by every stockholder, except perhaps in one or two cases, when the clerk was absent, the president transacted the business; and all the new stock was issued in this manner. After this use was made of the checks they were all destroyed. None of them were ever presented at the bank. In the case of fractional shares, parties concerned settled among themselves by payments in cash. The moneys of the corporation were from day to day deposited in the Blackstone National Bank, to the credit of Job A. Turner, treasurer, and drawn out and used in the transaction of the business of the corporation.

The checks were received by the respective stockholders on different days from May 14, to July 7, 1873, of which days there were on deposit in said Blackstone National Bank certain amounts to the credit of the treasurer; but these amounts were not specially provided or expected by the corporation to be drawn upon for the payment of said checks, nor were they sufficient therefor; but they were used by the corporation in the ordinary course of its business in the same manner as if no such checks had been given. Moneys were deposited by the corporation in said bank, and drawn out and expended from day to day in its business without regard to said checks. It was taken for granted that each stockholder would take his proportion of the new stock, and would use his dividend check to pay for it. All of the dividend checks were used in that manner; and the corporation was not prepared, and its officers did not expect, to pay them in any other manner. The bank account was not disturbed by any of these transactions, except so far as fractional shares were concerned, which were bought and sold. The corporation had no other bank account.

Warren Sanger was employed by Sarah Louise Hubbell, from the time of her appointment as executrix of the will of Peter Hubbell, to act for her as executrix, and in the management of her personal affairs. She left for Europe on November 9, 1872, and returned to the United States in August, 1873. Just before leaving, she gave to Sanger a power of attorney. Sanger received, on or about April 14, 1873, the notice to said executrix of that date, issued by the treasurer to the stockholders as before stated. He was present at the meeting of stockholders of April 14th, and knew of their vote. He did not see the vote of the directors, but gathered its purport only from the notice. On May 23, 1873, he received from the clerk of the corporation a check signed by the treasurer for $ 67,700 on the Blackstone National Bank, and signed a receipt therefor in the name of Sarah Louise Hubbell, executrix, by him as her attorney, in the form following: "We, the subscribers, acknowledge to have received of the treasurer of the Bay State Brick Company a dividend of the sums severally set against our names, being extra and special dividend of $ 50 per share, payable May 15, 1873. May 23. S. Louise Hubbell, Ex. Warren Sanger, Attorney."

On receiving this check, Sanger was told by the clerk to take it to the president of the corporation in the other room, and receive the certificate of the stock from him. He accordingly carried the check immediately to the president, and delivered it to him, and received certificates of 677 shares, for which he gave receipts. These certificates imported that the estate of Peter Hubbell was entitled to the shares.

Sanger was asked by the counsel for the heir of Peter Hubbell, "Did you understand that you could use the check for any other purpose than to pay for the stock?" This question was objected to; but the presiding judge ruled that it might be put; he thereupon answered that he understood that he could use the check only for that purpose; and to this ruling the counsel for the legatees of Mrs. Hubbell took exception.

Mrs. Hubbell arrived at New York, on her return from Europe, in August, 1873, very ill, not able to reach her home, and she died at a hotel in New York. Sanger saw her about three weeks before her death, and repeated to her orally what had been done, and that he had acted under the advice of her counsel in taking the new stock. Her mind was perfectly clear, but she did not express either assent or dissent. No papers were exhibited to her, nor did she know the form in which the certificates were taken. She was told that her counsel said it was a stock dividend.

On April 14, 1873, the surplus earnings and accumulations of the corporation were invested as shown by the statement of all its assets and liabilities then existing, contained in the report of the treasurer, amounting to $ 259,450.62.

No property was sold or converted into money to raise funds for the payment of said dividend or said checks, nor was any money ever specially provided or designed by the corporation for the payment thereof; nor did the corporation, in fact have cash on hand at any time sufficient...

To continue reading

Request your trial
49 cases
  • In re Nirdlinger's Estate
    • United States
    • Pennsylvania Supreme Court
    • June 25, 1927
    ...tenant and the remainderman depend on the substance and intent of the action of the corporation in declaring the dividend: Rand v. Hubbell, 115 Mass. 461, 474; Minot Paine, 99 Mass. 101, 108, 96 Am. Dec. 705. This means, in general, that all cash dividends are awarded to the life tenant, an......
  • R.I. Hosp. Trust Co. v. Bradley
    • United States
    • Rhode Island Supreme Court
    • April 17, 1918
    ...102 Mass. 542, 551: Lyman v. Pratt, 183 Mass. 58, 60, 66 N. E. 423; Heard v. Eldredge, 109 Mass. 258, 12 Am. Rep. 687; Rand v. Hubbell, 115 Mass. 461, 15 Am. Rep. 121; Davis v. Jackson, 152 Mass. 58, 25 N. E. 21, 23 Am. St. Rep 801; Hemenway v. Hemenway, 181 Mass. 406. 408, 63 N. E. 919; Hy......
  • Trefry v. Putnam
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • June 28, 1917
    ...Mass. 58, 61, 25 N. E. 21,23 Am. St. Rep. 801) and stock dividends (Dooge v. Leeds, 176 Mass. 558, 560, 57 N. E. 1025;Rand v. Hubbell, 115 Mass. 461, 15 Am. Rep. 121) are regarded as capital and not as income in this commonwealth. The rule of this commonwealth, to the effect that as between......
  • Anderson v. Bean
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • September 16, 1930
    ...the corporation or the acts of the trustee. The well recognized general rule is applicable to this branch of the case. Rand v. Hubbell, 115 Mass. 461, 474,15 Am. Rep. 121;Marsch v. Southern New England Railroad, 230 Mass. 483, 498, 120 N. E. 120. All the corporate dividends (except the one ......
  • 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