State ex rel. Barker v. Assurance Company of America

Decision Date28 June 1913
Citation158 S.W. 640,251 Mo. 278
PartiesTHE STATE ex rel. JOHN T. BARKER, Attorney-General, v. ASSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA et al
CourtMissouri Supreme Court

Demurrer overruled and temporary injunction issued.

John T Barker, Attorney-General, and W. M. Fitch, Assistant Attorney-General, for relator.

Judson Green & Henry, Lehman & Lehman, Thomas Bates, Seymour Edgerton, Jones, Hocker, Hawes & Angert, Bruce Barnett and Clyde Taylor for respondents.

WOODSON J. All concur as to paragraphs one and two, Walker, J., dissents from the opinion in toto; Bond, J., concurs in result; Lamm, C. J., and Graves, and Bond, JJ., concur in the third paragraph; Brown, Walker and Faris, JJ., dissent as to the third paragraph.

OPINION

In Banc.

Quo Warranto.

WOODSON J.

This is an information, in the nature of a quo warranto, instituted in this court, against the respondents, foreign fire insurance companies, duly authorized and licensed to do business in this State, to fine and otherwise punish them for violating the laws of the State regarding pools, trusts, conspiracies and discriminations.

The information charges that:

"The Amazonia Fire Insurance Company and others . . . are fire insurance corporations organized under the laws of other States or foreign countries, and are doing a fire insurance business in the State of Missouri, and at all the dates hereinafter mentioned were duly organized to do such business in the State of Missouri, having heretofore complied with the laws of the State of Missouri authorizing foreign fire insurance corporations to do business in this State; and at all times hereinafter mentioned respondents were engaged in the business of writing fire insurance contracts, policies and agreements insuring property from loss by fire or other causes, and conducting generally a fire insurance business throughout the State of Missouri; and that for many years respondents and each of them have been doing business in the State of Missouri with the consent of the State as foreign corporations and engaged in insuring property for the citizens and residents of Missouri against loss by fire and otherwise.

"That on the day of April, 1913, each and all of respondents unlawfully, illegally and wilfully misused and abused their said franchises, rights and privileges as foreign fire insurance companies authorized to do business under the laws of the State of Missouri in this, to-wit: that on said date each of said respondents did create, enter into, become a member of and participate in a certain pool, trust agreement, combination, confederation or understanding with each other and with other fire insurance corporations and associations of persons (whose names are unknown) against public policy and in restraint of trade, in this, to-wit: that on said date each and all respondents unlawfully, illegally and wilfully entered into an agreement to suspend operation and withdraw from sale all fire insurance in the State of Missouri, on the 30th day of April, 1913, and unlawfully agreed to refuse to accept, write, issue or sell any insurance on any properties located in said State of Missouri, and unlawfully agreed to withdraw from said State of Missouri by concerted movement simultaneously on said 30th day of April, 1913, and thus leave the citizens of the State of Missouri without adequate fire insurance protection, and unlawfully agreed to cancel all fire insurance policies heretofore written in the State of Missouri, which said action on the part of said respondents, if carried out, as they now propose, will cause a calamity in the financial world in said State of Missouri and leave the citizens of said State without any adequate fire insurance.

"Your informant further informs the court that the said unlawful agreement, combination, confederation, and conspiracy will affect the trade, traffic and commerce in this State, and that the same will be hindered, injured and retarded and the people of the State, will, after said 30th day of April, 1913, be denied the right to purchase fire insurance and to protect themselves and their property against loss by fire.

"Your informant further informs the court that the general nature and object of the said combination, conspiracy and confederation, so made as aforesaid, is to act in a concerted manner, simultaneously, and with a view to crippling and destroying the financial credit of the State of Missouri and the people therein, and to deny to the State of Missouri and the people therein the right to protect their property by insurance against loss or damage by fire, and such conspiracy, confederation and agreement is against public policy, in restraint of trade, and is intended at one blow to crush the entire business and commerce of the commonwealth of the State of Missouri.

"Your informant further informs the court that respondents and each of them are associated together in a common organization or interest called the 'Western Insurance Bureau,' which bureau is organized for the purpose of controlling the insurance business of the United States and particularly in Missouri, and for the further purpose of controlling, managing, regulating and conducting the entire insurance business in the State of Missouri, and that respondents and each of them are members of such insurance organization and association, and by the scheme of said association and respondents and each of them such association is authorized and empowered to and does approve rules and regulations for the government of the entire association and all of the members thereof and of each and all of the respondents herein, and when said rules and regulations are so fixed, as they now are, each member and each respondent herein is called upon and required and compelled by the rules of said association and by the rules of the respondents herein to obey, and that said association and that each of respondents do obey such rules, and that when said respondents created, entered into and became a member of and participated in such illegal agreement and combination and understanding with each other and with such association to suspend business and withdraw all fire insurance from sale in the State of Missouri, and to withdraw by such concerted action from such State, each of said respondents are required and commanded, by the rules and understanding between the said association and respondents and each of them, to comply therewith, and to suspend operation in said State of Missouri and to withdraw therefrom and to withdraw from sale all fire insurance in said State, and such understanding, agreement, confederation and combination is an abuse of the corporate privileges of each of said respondents and in violation of the laws of the State of Missouri, against public policy and is in restraint of trade.

"Your informant further informs the court that there has been promulgated by said association and by each of respondents herein, and approved by such association and by each of respondents herein, rules for the control of the members thereof, by which it is provided that no member of such association of insurance companies, including each of the respondents herein, shall write or sell insurance in the State of Missouri after April 30, 1913, and each of said respondents, as members of such insurance association and individually has illegally agreed to suspend operation and withdraw from sale all fire insurance in said State of Missouri on said April 30, 1913, and to withdraw in a concerted movement from said State of Missouri, and that by the rules of such association each and all of the respondents herein are compelled and required to withdraw from said State of Missouri, and to suspend operation therein and to withdraw from sale all fire insurance in said State, so that said association of insurance companies and the respondents herein have placed in the power of such insurance association to authorize and compel each insurance company named herein to immediately withdraw from said State of Missouri, and to suspend operation therein and to withdraw from sale all fire insurance in said State, thus leaving the people of the State of Missouri without any protection against loss by fire, and to prevent citizens of the State of Missouri from securing any fire insurance and thus injure and destroy the commercial value of the State of Missouri, and to deprive the citizens of said State of Missouri of the right which they have heretofore enjoyed of having their property insured by said respondents or either of them, against loss by fire, and that each of said respondents entered into such illegal agreement with the express and avowed purpose of injuring and destroying the credit and commercial value of the State of Missouri.

"Your informant further informs the court that the object and purpose of such association which met as aforesaid on April --, 1913, was and is to stifle competition in the insurance business in the State of Missouri by withdrawing its membership and refusing to write insurance and thus lessen competition in the insurance business in said State of Missouri, and to deny to the citizens of said State of Missouri the right to purchase fire insurance, and each and all members of such association and the respondents herein are banded together for a common cause to injure and destroy the value of property in the State of Missouri and are acting in a rebellious and retaliatory manner and are now threatening to immediately suspend operation and to withdraw from the State of Missouri in a concerted movement on the 30th day of April, 1913, and that respondents and each of them are now actively and earnestly engaged in carrying out said purpose by the use of every means known to them, and are now preparing to and are...

To continue reading

Request your trial
18 cases
  • Becker v. Thompson
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • November 20, 1934
    ... ... 1049; Ott v ... Stone, 29 S.W.2d 726; State v. Trimble, 28 ... S.W.2d 75; Large v. Frick ... of the Interstate Hotel Company, which corporation owned ... leases on hotels at ... 95, l. c. 99 ... (1); State ex rel. v. Assurance Co. of America, 251 ... Mo. 278, ... ...
  • Thompson v. Farmers' Exchange Bank
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • August 3, 1933
    ...Crow v. Shepherd, 177 Mo. 234; Ex parte Mason, 16 Mo.App. 44; Ry. Co. v. Gildersleeve, 219 Mo. 177; 7 R. C. L. 1034, sec. 63; State v. Assurance Co., 251 Mo. 278; Shull v. Boyd, 251 Mo. 478; Leman Krentler-Arnold Co. (U.S.), 52 S.Ct. 238, 76 L.Ed. 336; Blackmer v. United States (U.S.), 76 L......
  • Hughes v. Kansas City Motion Picture Machine Operators
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • April 30, 1920
    ... ... of the State Constitution, and Amendments 1 and 14 to the ... members, so ruled in State ex rel. v. Assurance ... Companies, 251 Mo. 278, 291, ... 331] ... Company v. Fuelle, 215 Mo. 421, 114 S.W. 997. That ... ...
  • Hammett v. Kansas City
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • May 4, 1943
    ... ... 57, 74 L.Ed. 221, 65 A ... L. R. 371; State ex rel. Bair v. Producers Gravel ... Co., 341 ... 1041, 47 ... S.W.2d 781; State ex rel. Barker v. Assur. Co. of ... America, 251 Mo. 278, 158 ... ...
  • 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