South Missouri Pine Lumber Co. v. Crommer
Decision Date | 28 March 1907 |
Citation | 101 S.W. 22,202 Mo. 504 |
Parties | SOUTH MISSOURI PINE LUMBER CO. v. CROMMER et al. |
Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court; Jas. R. Kinealy, Judge.
Action by the South Missouri Pine Lumber Company against William Crommer and others. From a judgment for defendants, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
Plaintiff, the South Missouri Pine Lumber Company, is a Missouri corporation, organized on March 24, 1900, whose certificate of organization was issued by the Secretary of State March 26, 1900. Plaintiff was organized with a capital stock of $50,000, divided into 500 shares of $100 each. Of these shares A. J. Haus subscribed 169, E. P. Ewart 141, W. F. Maxwell 95, and E. C. Hartwig 95. Ewart, who is defendant herein, was an experienced lumberman, formerly of Topeka, Kan., and later of St. Joseph, Mo. A. J. Haus, who is no party to the action, was an experienced lumberman of St. Joseph, Mo. Maxwell and Hartwig, stockholders in the company with Ewart and Haus, were bankers, without experience in or knowledge of the lumber business. The defendants in this case are E. P. Ewart, an original stockholder in plaintiff company, but not such at time of suit, S. E. Newhouse, William Crommer, William F. Crommer, and S. J. Malugen. From the petition and from the evidence it appears: That the two Crommers owned a large tract of land in south Missouri upon which there was saw timber of different kinds and character. They likewise owned sawmill plants situated upon portions of their property. The Crommers were and had been in hard straits financially. At one time, prior to the transactions involved in this case, they had, through the instrumentality of S. E. Newhouse, of St. Louis, procured a loan of $3,000 upon this property, from the Wesleyan College, of Warrenton, Mo. That, still being in hard straits financially, they placed their property upon the market with defendant S. E. Newhouse, authorizing said Newhouse to sell said property for $21,000, and agreeing to pay him, out of the $21,000, the sum of $500, and further agreeing with him that whatever he got over and above $21,000 he should receive as his commission, in addition to the $500 hereinabove mentioned. It seems that, with this proposition upon his hands, Newhouse, through one Martin of Topeka, Kan., and Brewster of St. Joseph, Mo., interested Haus and Ewart of St. Joseph, and they in turn interested Maxwell and Hartwig.
From the start it appears that Maxwell and Hartwig were in favor of organizing a corporation to take care of the Crommer property, or whatever property might be bought. Maxwell would not go in unless they incorporated. So far as the evidence shows, neither Newhouse nor the Crommers knew anything about these first discussions of organizing and incorporating the plaintiff company. Prior to the organization of the company it was agreed between Haus, Ewart, Maxwell, and Hartwig, the prospective incorporators, that Haus and Ewart should proceed to south Missouri, and examine the Crommer plant and lands, and negotiate for the purchase of same. Accordingly they left St. Joseph for that purpose, with the knowledge of Maxwell and Hartwig. But before leaving they had an understanding with Maxwell and Hartwig that they and each of them had real estate which they would like to trade in on the deal in lieu of a cash contribution for their stock in said proposed company. Haus and Ewart went to Elsinore, where the Crommer lumber plant was situated, and were there met by defendant Newhouse, the agent of the Crommers, as well as by the Crommers themselves, together with one Kirkland, who was the timberman for the Crommers. Under the guidance of Kirkland, Haus and Ewart inspected a portion of the timber lands then offered for sale by the Crommers, and were asked, especially by young Crommer, to inspect it all. After this inspection, and on March 15, 1900, the parties entered into the following contract:
About the time the contract above quoted was signed, Haus and Ewart wrote and telegraphed Maxwell to come down and inspect the property. Maxwell was there on March 19th, saw what purported to be a portion of the property, accepted the contract, and paid the $450 mentioned in the contract. He then returned to St. Joseph, where later, on the dates hereinabove mentioned, plaintiff corporation was organized and chartered. Maxwell and Hartwig each put in $5,000 in cash. On April 2, 1900, deed was made by the Crommers to the corporation, at which...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Jennings Heights Land & Improvement Co. v. City of St. Louis
...201 Mo. 91, 98 S.W. 753; Paving Co. v. Field, 188 Mo. 182, 86 S.W. 860; Bank v. Hutton, 224 Mo. 42, 123 S.W. 47; Lumber Co. v. Crommer, 202 Mo. 504, 101 S.W. 22; Strong v. Whybark, 204 Mo. 341, 102 S.W. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. All concur. Woodson, J., in result. ...
-
Brooker v. William H. Thompson Trust Company
... ... THOMPSON TRUST COMPANY et al Supreme Court of Missouri, First Division January 3, 1914 ... ... Sawyer, 146 ... Mo. 302, 322, 47 S.W. 951; South Joplin Land Co. v ... Case, 104 Mo. 579; Lumber Co. v. Crommer, 202 ... Mo. 504, 518, 101 S.W. 22.] In the case last ... ...
-
Kay v. Politte
...proved by the party charging it by evidence inconsistent with a contrary view. Gordon v. Ismay, 55 Mo.App. 323; So. Mo. Pine & Lbr. Co. v. Crommer, 202 Mo. 504; Decker v. Diemer, 229 Mo. 296; Stahlhuth Nagle, 229 Mo. 570; Zehnder v. Shark, 248 Mo. 39; Flood v. Busch, 165 Mo.App. 142; Reger ......
-
Kay v. Politte., 35620.
...the party charging it by evidence inconsistent with a contrary view. Gordon v. Ismay, 55 Mo. App. 323; So. Mo. Pine & Lbr. Co. v. Crommer, 202 Mo. 504; Decker v. Diemer, 229 Mo. 296; Stahlhuth v. Nagle, 229 Mo. 570; Zehnder v. Shark, 248 Mo. 39; Flood v. Busch, 165 Mo. App. 142; Reger v. Re......